DXOMARK https://www.dxomark.com/ The leading source of independent audio, display, battery and image quality measurements and ratings for smartphone, camera, lens, wireless speaker and laptop since 2008. Thu, 03 Jul 2025 14:31:19 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3 https://www.dxomark.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/logo-o-transparent-150x150.png DXOMARK https://www.dxomark.com/ 32 32 Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge Display test https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s25-edge-display-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s25-edge-display-test/#respond Thu, 03 Jul 2025 14:31:18 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=185082&preview=true&preview_id=185082 We put the Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across four criteria. In this test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key display specifications 6.7 inches Dynamic AMOLED 2X (~91.5% screen-to-body ratio) Dimensions: [...]

The post Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across four criteria. In this test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key display specifications

  • 6.7 inches Dynamic AMOLED 2X (~91.5% screen-to-body ratio)
  • Dimensions: 158.2 x 75.6 x 5.8 mm (6.23 x 2.98 x 0.23 inches)
  • Resolution: 1440 x 3120 pixels, (~513 ppi density)
  • Aspect ratio: 19.5:9
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz

Scoring

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

Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
158
display
Readability
155

164

Color
158

165

Video
167

Best

Touch
146

164

DISPLAY
Position in Global Ranking
2nd
1. Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
160
2. Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
158
2. Google Pixel 9 Pro
158
2. Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
158
5. Honor Magic6 Pro
157
5. Samsung Galaxy S25+
157
5. Samsung Galaxy S25
157
8. Google Pixel 9
156
9. Google Pixel 9a
155
9. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
155
11. Google Pixel 8 Pro
154
11. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold6
154
11. Samsung Galaxy S24+ (Exynos)
154
11. Samsung Galaxy S24 (Exynos)
154
15. Google Pixel 8
153
15. Honor Magic7 Pro
153
15. Vivo X100 Pro
153
18. Google Pixel 9 Pro Fold
152
18. Oppo Find X8 Pro
152
20. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
151
20. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
151
20. Honor Magic V2
151
20. Honor Magic5 Pro
151
20. Honor 200 Pro
151
25. Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
150
25. Apple iPhone 16 Pro
150
25. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip6
150
25. Samsung Galaxy A56
150
25. Xiaomi 15 Ultra
150
30. Honor Magic V3
149
30. Honor 400
149
30. Samsung Galaxy S23
149
33. Google Pixel 7 Pro
148
33. Huawei Pocket 2
148
33. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+
148
33. Huawei Mate 60 Pro
148
33. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra
148
33. Xiaomi 15
148
39. Honor 200
147
39. Samsung Galaxy S23+
147
39. Samsung Galaxy A55 5G
147
42. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
146
42. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
146
44. Google Pixel Fold
145
44. Google Pixel 8a
145
44. Samsung Galaxy S24 FE
145
44. Vivo X Fold3 Pro
145
48. Oppo Find X7 Ultra
144
48. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
144
50. Asus Zenfone 11 Ultra
143
50. Huawei P60 Pro
143
50. OnePlus 13
143
50. Samsung Galaxy A35 5G
143
50. Xiaomi 14T Pro
143
55. Apple iPhone 16
142
55. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
142
55. Oppo Find N2 Flip
142
55. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
142
55. Xiaomi 14T
142
60. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
141
61. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
140
61. Apple iPhone 15
140
61. Honor 90
140
61. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
140
61. Xiaomi 14 Ultra
140
66. Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
139
67. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
138
67. Apple iPhone 14
138
67. Honor Magic4 Ultimate
138
67. Oppo Find X6 Pro
138
71. OnePlus Open
137
71. Oppo Find X5 Pro
137
71. Vivo X Fold
137
71. Xiaomi 14
137
75. Google Pixel 7
136
75. Honor Magic Vs
136
75. Motorola Edge 50 Neo
136
78. Apple iPhone 13
135
78. Google Pixel 7a
135
78. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
135
78. Vivo X90 Pro+
135
78. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G
135
83. Huawei P50 Pro
134
83. Nothing Phone (2)
134
83. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
134
86. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
133
86. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
133
86. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
133
86. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
133
86. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)
133
91. Asus ROG Phone 7
132
91. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
132
91. Vivo X90 Pro
132
91. Xiaomi Mix Fold 3
132
91. Xiaomi 13
132
96. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
131
96. Sony Xperia 5 IV
131
96. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
131
96. Xiaomi 13 Pro
131
100. Apple iPhone 13 mini
130
100. Google Pixel 6 Pro
130
100. Honor Magic4 Pro
130
100. Oppo Find X5
130
100. Realme GT 2 Pro
130
100. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
130
100. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
130
100. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
130
100. Vivo X70 Pro+
130
100. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
130
100. Xiaomi 12T
130
111. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
129
111. Xiaomi 13T Pro
129
111. Xiaomi 13T
129
114. Oppo Find N2
128
115. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
127
115. Asus ROG Phone 6
127
115. Sony Xperia 5 V
127
115. Xiaomi 12T Pro
127
119. Asus Zenfone 10
126
119. Oppo Find X6
126
119. Sony Xperia 1 IV
126
119. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
126
123. Google Pixel 6a
125
123. Google Pixel 6
125
123. Honor 70
125
123. Oppo Find X3 Pro
125
123. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
125
123. Xiaomi Mi 11
125
123. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
125
130. Apple iPhone 12 Pro
124
130. Motorola Razr 50
124
130. OnePlus 11
124
130. OnePlus 10 Pro
124
130. OnePlus 9 Pro
124
130. Oppo Reno8 5G
124
136. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
123
136. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
123
136. Oppo Find X3 Neo
123
136. Xiaomi 12 Pro
123
140. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
122
140. Motorola Edge 40 Pro
122
140. Nothing Phone(1)
122
143. Apple iPhone 12
121
144. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
120
144. Realme GT 5G
120
146. Fairphone 5
119
146. Xiaomi 12
119
148. Asus Zenfone 8
115
148. Oppo Reno6 5G
115
150. Realme GT Neo 2 5G
114
150. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
114
152. Motorola Razr 40 Ultra
113
152. Oppo Find X5 Lite
113
154. POCO F4 GT
111
155. Crosscall Stellar-X5
109
156. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
108
157. Sony Xperia 10 V
105
158. Sony Xperia 10 IV
104
159. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
103
160. Crosscall Stellar-M6
101
161. Black Shark 5 Pro
100
162. Vivo X80 Lite 5G
99
163. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
82
DISPLAY
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
2nd
1. Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
160
2. Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
158
2. Google Pixel 9 Pro
158
2. Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
158
5. Honor Magic6 Pro
157
5. Samsung Galaxy S25+
157
7. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
155
8. Google Pixel 8 Pro
154
8. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold6
154
8. Samsung Galaxy S24+ (Exynos)
154
11. Honor Magic7 Pro
153
11. Vivo X100 Pro
153
13. Google Pixel 9 Pro Fold
152
13. Oppo Find X8 Pro
152
15. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
151
15. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
151
15. Honor Magic V2
151
15. Honor Magic5 Pro
151
19. Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
150
19. Apple iPhone 16 Pro
150
19. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip6
150
19. Xiaomi 15 Ultra
150
23. Honor Magic V3
149
24. Google Pixel 7 Pro
148
24. Huawei Pocket 2
148
24. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+
148
24. Huawei Mate 60 Pro
148
24. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra
148
24. Xiaomi 15
148
30. Samsung Galaxy S23+
147
31. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
146
31. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
146
33. Google Pixel Fold
145
33. Vivo X Fold3 Pro
145
35. Oppo Find X7 Ultra
144
35. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
144
37. Asus Zenfone 11 Ultra
143
37. Huawei P60 Pro
143
37. OnePlus 13
143
40. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
142
40. Oppo Find N2 Flip
142
40. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
142
43. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
141
44. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
140
44. Xiaomi 14 Ultra
140
46. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
138
46. Honor Magic4 Ultimate
138
46. Oppo Find X6 Pro
138
49. OnePlus Open
137
49. Oppo Find X5 Pro
137
49. Vivo X Fold
137
52. Honor Magic Vs
136
53. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
135
53. Vivo X90 Pro+
135
55. Huawei P50 Pro
134
55. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
134
57. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
133
57. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
133
57. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
133
57. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)
133
61. Asus ROG Phone 7
132
61. Vivo X90 Pro
132
61. Xiaomi Mix Fold 3
132
64. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
131
64. Sony Xperia 5 IV
131
64. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
131
64. Xiaomi 13 Pro
131
68. Google Pixel 6 Pro
130
68. Honor Magic4 Pro
130
68. Oppo Find X5
130
68. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
130
68. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
130
68. Vivo X70 Pro+
130
68. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
130
75. Oppo Find N2
128
76. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
127
76. Asus ROG Phone 6
127
76. Sony Xperia 5 V
127
79. Oppo Find X6
126
79. Sony Xperia 1 IV
126
81. Oppo Find X3 Pro
125
81. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
125
81. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
125
84. Apple iPhone 12 Pro
124
84. Motorola Razr 50
124
84. OnePlus 10 Pro
124
84. OnePlus 9 Pro
124
88. Xiaomi 12 Pro
123
89. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
122
89. Motorola Edge 40 Pro
122
91. Motorola Razr 40 Ultra
113
92. Crosscall Stellar-X5
109
93. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
103

Pros

  • High peak luminance and excellent screen readability, even in challenging lighting conditions
  • Strong video performance in low-light and indoor environments
  • Consistently smooth and responsive touch interaction across all use cases

Cons

  • Brightness adjustment is not well-optimized for low-light and dark environments
  • Inadequate handling of accidental or unintentional touches

 

The Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge delivers outstanding overall performance, with video quality standing out as a key strength, earning the top spot in our rankings for that specific area. Its performance closely matches that of its premium sibling, the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra, with the primary exception being screen readability. While the display remains highly readable and provides a comfortable viewing experience in most conditions, comparable to higher-tier devices, the absence of an anti-reflective coating results in reduced readability under bright lighting. Additionally, in indoor and low-light settings, the screen can appear excessively bright compared to competitors, which may cause slight discomfort during prolonged use.

Video playback is where the Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge truly excels. It delivers impressive brightness in both SDR and HDR10 formats, maintains a well-balanced contrast between dark and bright areas, and experiences no frame drops—making it an excellent choice for all types of video content.

Touch responsiveness is another highlight, offering smooth interactions and exceptionally fast response times that rival even flagship-level smartphones.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Display tests: For scoring and analysis, a device undergoes a series of objective and perceptual tests in controlled lab and real-life conditions. The DXOMARK Display score takes into account the overall user experience the screen provides, considering the hardware capacity and the software tuning. In testing, only factory-installed video and photo apps are used.  More in-depth details about how DXOMARK tests displays are available in the article “A closer look at DXOMARK Display testing.”

The following section focuses on the key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Full reports with detailed performance evaluations are available upon request. To order a copy, please contact us.

Readability

155

Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge

164

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
i
How Display Readability score is composed

Readability evaluates the user’s ease and comfort of viewing still content, such as photos or a web page, on the display under different lighting conditions. Our measurements run in the labs are completed by perceptual testing and analysis.

Learn more about how we test display readability
Luminance under various lighting conditions
This graph shows the screen luminance in environments that range from total darkness to outdoor conditions. In our labs, the indoor environment (250 lux to 830 lux) simulates the artificial and natural lighting conditions commonly seen in homes (with medium diffusion); the outdoor environment (from 20,000 lux) replicates a situation with highly diffused light.
Contrast under various lighting conditions
This graph shows the screen’s contrast levels in lighting environments that range from total darkness to outdoor conditions. In our labs, the indoor environment (250 lux to 830 lux) simulates the artificial and natural lighting conditions commonly seen in homes (with medium diffusion); the outdoor environment (from 20,000 lux) replicates a situation with highly diffused light.
Photo EOTF
The Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) defines how bits are converted into luminance out of the display. Gray levels (horizontal axis) represent the different shades from pure white (100% gray level) to pitch black (0% gray level). The standard for still images follows a 2.2 gamma. The flatter the curves, the harder it is to perceive differences between consecutive shades. This phenomenon is more frequent under intensive lighting conditions (20,000 lux) in the low gray level regions.
Photo EOTF
The Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) defines how bits are converted into luminance out of the display. Gray levels (horizontal axis) represent the different shades from pure white (100% gray level) to pitch black (0% gray level). The standard for still images follows a 2.2 gamma. The flatter the curves, the harder it is to perceive differences between consecutive shades. This phenomenon is more frequent under intensive lighting conditions (20,000 lux) in the low gray level regions.
Photo EOTF
The Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) defines how bits are converted into luminance out of the display. Gray levels (horizontal axis) represent the different shades from pure white (100% gray level) to pitch black (0% gray level). The standard for still images follows a 2.2 gamma. The flatter the curves, the harder it is to perceive differences between consecutive shades. This phenomenon is more frequent under intensive lighting conditions (20,000 lux) in the low gray level regions.
Luminance vs Viewing Angle
This graph presents how the luminance drops as viewing angles increase.


Skin-tone rendering in an indoor (1000 lux) environment
From left to right: Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge, Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra, Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
(Photos for illustration only)


Skin-tone rendering in a sunlight (>90 000 lux) environment
From left to right: Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge, Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra, Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
(Photos for illustration only)
Average Reflectance (SCI) Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
4.6 %
Low
Good
Bad
High
Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
SCI stands for Specular Component Included, which measures both the diffuse reflection and the specular reflection. Reflection from a simple glass sheet is around 4%, while it reaches about 6% for a plastic sheet. Although smartphones’ first surface is made of glass, their total reflection (without coating) is usually around 5% due to multiple reflections created by the complex optical stack.
Average reflectance is computed based on the spectral reflectance in the visible spectrum range (see graph below) and human spectral sensitivity.
Reflectance (SCI)
Wavelength (horizontal axis) defines light color, but also our capacity to see it; for example, UV is a very low wavelength that the human eye cannot see; Infrared is a high wavelength that the human eye also cannot see). White light is composed of all wavelengths between 400 nm and 700 nm, i.e. the range the human eye can see. Measurements above show the reflection of the devices within the visible spectrum range (400 nm to 700 nm).

Uniformity
This graph shows the distribution of luminance throughout the entire display panel. Uniformity is measured with a 20% gray pattern, with bright green indicating ideal luminance. An evenly spread-out bright green color on the screen indicates that the display’s brightness is uniform. Other colors indicate a loss of uniformity.
PWM Frequency Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
480 Hz
Bad
Good
Bad
Great
Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
Pulse width modulation is a modulation technique that generates variable-width pulses to represent the amplitude of an analog input signal. This measurement is important for comfort because flickering at low frequencies can be perceived by some individuals, and in the most extreme cases, can induce seizures. Some experiments show that discomfort can appear at a higher frequency. A high PWM frequency (>1500 Hz) tends to be less disturbing for users.
Temporal Light Modulation
This graph represents the frequencies of lighting variation; the highest peak gives the most important modulation. The combination of a low frequency and a high peak is susceptible to inducing eye fatigue.

Color

158

Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge

165

Google Pixel 8
i
How Display Color score is composed

Color evaluations are performed in different lighting conditions to see how well the device manages color with the surrounding environment. Devices are tested with sRGB and Display-P3 image patterns. Both faithful mode and default mode are used for our evaluation. Our measurements run in the labs are completed by perceptual testing & analysis.

Learn more about how we test display color
White point color under D65 illuminant at 830 lux
This graph shows the white point coordinates for the image pattern using the default or the faithful mode. D65 illuminant (6500 Kelvin) is a standard that defines the color of white at midday; it is used for display calibration as a white reference, therefore devices are expected to be at or close to the D65 white point.
Color fidelity
Each arrow represents the color difference between a target color pattern (base of the arrow) and its actual measurement (tip of the arrow). The longer the arrow, the more visible the color difference is. If the arrow stays within the circle, the color difference will be visible only to trained eyes. The tested color mode is the most faithful proposed by each device, and a color correction is applied to account for the different white points of each device.
White color shift with angle
This graph shows the color shift when the screen is at an angle. Each dot represents a measurement at a particular angle. Dots inside the inner circle exhibit no color shift in angle; those between the inner and outer circle have shifts that only trained experts will see; but those falling outside the outer circle are noticeable.
Circadian Action Factor Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
0.71
Good
Good
Bad
Bad
Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
The circadian action factor is a metric that defines how light impacts the human sleep cycle. It is the ratio of the light energy contributing to sleep disturbances (centered around 450 nm, representing blue light) over the light energy contributing to our perception (covering 400 nm to 700 nm and centered on 550 nm, which is green light). A high circadian action factor means that the ambient light contains strong blue-light energy and is likely to affect the body’s sleep cycle, while a low circadian action factor implies the light has weak blue-light energy and is less likely to affect sleeping patterns.
Spectrum of white emission with Night mode ON
Spectrum measurements of a white web page with BLF mode on and off. This graph shows the impact of blue light filtering on the whole spectrum. All other settings used are default, in particular, the luminance level follows the auto-brightness adaptation from the manufacturer.
The wavelength (horizontal axis) defines light color but also the capacity to see it. For example, UV, which has a very low wavelength, and infra-red, which has a high wavelength, are both not visible to the human eye. White light is composed of all wavelengths between 400 nm and 700 nm, which is the range visible to the human eye.
Spectrum of white emission with Night mode OFF
Spectrum measurements of a white web page with BLF mode on and off. This graph shows the impact of blue light filtering on the whole spectrum. All other settings used are default, in particular, the luminance level follows the auto-brightness adaptation from the manufacturer.
The wavelength (horizontal axis) defines light color but also the capacity to see it. For example, UV, which has a very low wavelength, and infra-red, which has a high wavelength, are both not visible to the human eye. White light is composed of all wavelengths between 400 nm and 700 nm, which is the range visible to the human eye.

Video

167

Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge

Best

i
How Display Video score is composed

The video attribute evaluates the Standard Dynamic Range (SDR) and High Dynamic Range (HDR10) video handling in indoor and low-light conditions . Our measurements run in the labs are completed by perceptual testing and analysis.

Learn more about how we test display Video
Video peak luminance vs Lighting conditions
This bar chart presents the peak luminance measured for SDR and HDR10 content on a 10% window white pattern.
Video peak luminance vs Lighting conditions
This bar chart presents the peak luminance measured for SDR and HDR10 content on a 10% window white pattern.


Video rendering in a low-light (0 lux) environment
Clockwise from top left: Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge, Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra, Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
(Photos for illustration only)

SDR video EOTF curve
These curves represent the SDR video tone distribution for white color.
The Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) defines how bits are converted into luminance out of the display. Gray levels (horizontal axis) represent the different shades from pure white (100% gray level) to pitch black (0% gray level). The standard for SDR videos follows a 2.2 gamma. The flatter the curves, the harder it is to perceive differences between consecutive shades. This phenomenon is more frequent under bright lighting conditions (830 lux) in the low gray levels region (< 30%).
SDR video EOTF curve
These curves represent the SDR video tone distribution for white color.
The Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) defines how bits are converted into luminance out of the display. Gray levels (horizontal axis) represent the different shades from pure white (100% gray level) to pitch black (0% gray level). The standard for SDR videos follows a 2.2 gamma. The flatter the curves, the harder it is to perceive differences between consecutive shades. This phenomenon is more frequent under bright lighting conditions (830 lux) in the low gray levels region (< 30%).
HDR10 video EOTF curve
These curves represent the HDR10 video tone distribution for white color.
The Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) defines how bits are converted into luminance out of the display. Gray levels (horizontal axis) represent the different shades from pure white (100% gray level) to pitch black (0% gray level). While the PQ (Perceptual Quantizer) standard is reminded here for reference, it cannot be a target for smartphones as it is an absolute standard whereas smartphones adapt their brightness to lighting conditions. The flatter the curves, the harder it is to perceive differences between consecutive shades. This phenomenon is more frequent under bright lighting conditions (830 lux) in the low gray levels region (< 30%).
HDR10 video EOTF curve
These curves represent the HDR10 video tone distribution for white color.
The Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) defines how bits are converted into luminance out of the display. Gray levels (horizontal axis) represent the different shades from pure white (100% gray level) to pitch black (0% gray level). While the PQ (Perceptual Quantizer) standard is reminded here for reference, it cannot be a target for smartphones as it is an absolute standard whereas smartphones adapt their brightness to lighting conditions. The flatter the curves, the harder it is to perceive differences between consecutive shades. This phenomenon is more frequent under bright lighting conditions (830 lux) in the low gray levels region (< 30%).
Gamut coverage for video content under 0 lux environment
The primary colors are measured both in HDR10 and SDR. The solid color gamut measures the extent of the color area that the device can render in total darkness. The dotted line represents the content’s artistic intent. The measured gamut should match the master color space of each video.
Gamut coverage for video content under 830 lux environment
The primary colors are measured both in HDR10 and SDR. The solid color gamut measures the extent of the color area that the device can render in total darkness. The dotted line represents the content’s artistic intent. The measured gamut should match the master color space of each video.
SDR Video Frame Drops FHD at 30 fps
0.1 %
Few
Good
Bad
Many
Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
HDR Video Frame Drops UHD at 30 fps
0.1 %
Few
Good
Bad
Many
Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
These gauges present the percentage of frame irregularities in a 30-second video. These irregularities are not necessarily perceived by users (unless they are all located at the same time stamp) but are an indicator of performance.

Touch

146

Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge

164

Google Pixel 7 Pro
i
How Display Touch score is composed

We evaluate the touch attributes under many types of contents where touch is key, and requires different behaviors such as gaming (quick touch to response time), web (smooth scrolling of the page) and images (accurate and smooth navigation from one image to another).

Learn more about how we test display touch
Average Touch Response Time Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
66 ms
Fast
Good
Bad
Slow
Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
Touch To Display response time
This response time test precisely evaluates the time elapsed between a single touch of the robot on the screen and the displayed action. This test is applied to activities that require high reactivity, such as gaming.

The post Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s25-edge-display-test/feed/ 0 Best DISPLAY DISPLAY Samsung_Galaxy_S25_Edge_readability_skintone_indoor Samsung_Galaxy_S25_Edge_readability_skintone_sunlight Samsung_Galaxy_S25_Edge_readability_uniformity Best Samsung_Galaxy_S25_Edge_video_lowlight What’s New in DXOMARK’s Camera protocol? https://www.dxomark.com/dxomark-smartphone-camera-protocol-v6/ https://www.dxomark.com/dxomark-smartphone-camera-protocol-v6/#respond Wed, 25 Jun 2025 18:40:49 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=185512&preview=true&preview_id=185512 At DXOMARK, the evolution of our protocols is a continuous process, aimed at keeping pace with the accelerating innovation in smartphone imaging. With each generation of devices introducing new technologies and user-centric features, our testing methodologies adapt accordingly, not only to stay up to date but also to ensure our scores remain relevant and meaningful [...]

The post What’s New in DXOMARK’s Camera protocol? appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>

At DXOMARK, the evolution of our protocols is a continuous process, aimed at keeping pace with the accelerating innovation in smartphone imaging. With each generation of devices introducing new technologies and user-centric features, our testing methodologies adapt accordingly, not only to stay up to date but also to ensure our scores remain relevant and meaningful for real-world users.

Today, we officially unveiled the 6th version of our Smartphone Camera Protocol, the most advanced and user-aligned protocol to date. This release is the product of our traditional multi-phase development strategy that reflects both technical rigor and human-centric evaluation.

A methodological framework grounded in real-world use

Each update to our protocol follows a structured methodology built on major key pillars, starting with identifying user needs and preferences, developing representative and repeatable test scenarios, and culminating in the thorough evaluation and scoring of products.

Understanding user needs and preferences

Our foundation lies in in-depth research, including multi-year investigations about user preferences through DXOMARK Insights. These studies, conducted with large panel groups, explore key user pain points, particularly in challenging domains such as HDR portrait photography. Since 2023, we have carried out extensive studies across China, India and Europe, uncovering detailed insights about user expectations in portrait photography.

To enrich this broad understanding, DXOMARK regularly collaborates with independent experts in their fields (photographers, video makers…). Ahead of the launch of our Camera v6 protocol, we are deepening our engagement through the creation of the DXOMARK Expert Committee, a body of professionals and academic experts who provide valuable perspectives on emerging trends and real-world usage scenarios.

Designing representative and repeatable test scenarios

At our state-of-the-art labs in Boulogne-Billancourt, we design tests that mirror real-world usage with scientific precision. Our approach combines objective measurements and perceptual testing, covering a wide range of lighting conditions, motion scenarios, and diverse skin tones. Purpose-built setups and proprietary tools enable us to achieve a new level of granularity in testing. Beyond the lab, we also conduct tests and analyses in varied natural environments. Each device is tested extensively with over 4000 photos captured and 200 minutes of video recorded under a wide range of conditions.

Scoring: The tip of the iceberg

While our scores are publicly visible, they represent just the surface of a comprehensive evaluation process. These scores distill the end-user experience into a clear, comparable format. With the launch of our sixth-generation protocol, we introduce a revamped scoring architecture and weighting system, aligned with an updated testing matrix and newly refined quality metrics.

What’s new in the new version of our protocol?

The sixth version of our protocol introduces updates across three key areas:

    • Enhanced HDR evaluation, featuring a new testing process and refined scoring methodology.
    • Updated portrait testing, informed by recent global studies to better reflect real-world user expectations.
    • Expanded focus on zoom performance, with particular attention to video zoom capabilities.

Now, let’s dive into the details of our protocol updates

Portrait evaluation: adapting to user trends and expectations

Taking portrait photos is one of the most common and emotionally resonant use cases in smartphone photography. Guided by our extensive insights run between 2023 and 2025 in different parts of the world, we identified 3 key elements looked at by users while defining a good portrait picture: a consistently well exposed face and overall picture, natural skin tones as well as an accurate and neutral white balance. We also observed that users were consistently unhappy and still identified challenges when it came to lowlight and nigh photography, which still represented major challenges for users.

These insights provided us with clear guidelines on users’ expectations as well as general trends on preferences, that directly drive our methodology and our tests.

What have we changed in our evaluations?

To better reflect real-world usage, including both everyday and challenging situations, we’ve significantly upgraded our portrait testing protocols:

    • 50 new portrait scenes, covering a full range of lighting conditions, from moonlight to sunlight, captured both in natural environments and simulated lab settings. In total, we now evaluate 9 lighting conditions in photo and 13 in video.
    • A broader spectrum of skin tones, ensuring inclusive and comprehensive evaluation across diverse subjects.
    • Three motion profiles, simulating real user behavior, from static handheld shooting (two-handed grip) to walking scenarios (for video), to test performance in typical portrait capture situations.

 

Our tools and test methods have evolved to deliver deeper, more meaningful insights into image quality. At the core of this is our newly developed All-in-One Portrait Lab setup, powered by Analyzer, designed to simulate real-world challenges in a controlled environment. It includes:

    • Two high-fidelity mannequins representing deep and fair skin tones, used to assess facial detail preservation.
    • Dynamic lighting simulation, covering a wide range from 0.1 lux to 10,000 lux, to evaluate performance under various illumination levels.
    • Motion simulation tools, including moving objects, a hexapod (six-axis motion platform), and a time box to rigorously test autofocus accuracy and motion blur.
    • Reflective and transmissive gray scales, supporting in-depth analysis of noise and contrast behavior.

To complete the evaluation of portraits, we now run a systematic perceptual evaluation of flare, which can affect facial clarity and background rendition.

HDR: A consistent evaluation of the HDR formats

As outlined in our recent publications, HDR is reshaping the landscape of smartphone photography. As brands explore various approaches to HDR integration (see our China Insights), new creative opportunities are emerging, alongside fresh technical challenges. The evolution of HDR formats now includes standardized versions that are compatible across a wide range of smartphones, ensuring more consistent user experiences.

To reflect the growing importance of HDR, we have now integrated a dedicated and systematic evaluation of HDR performance into our testing protocol, applicable when the tested device supports a publicly documented format that is compatible with common HDR viewing tools. This enhancement ensures a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of how HDR impacts image quality across devices.

It includes:

    • Expanded HDR scenes coverage: our testing now includes a broader range of natural scenes (across all lighting conditions, including night scenes) as well as in controlled lab environments using our AF-HDR setup.
    • New lab-based metrics: Additional objective measurements offer finer granularity in assessing HDR performance under reproducible conditions.
    • Perceptual analysis with professional reference HDR display: Evaluations are conducted using our AQuA tool (which brings an objective perspective on perceptual analysis) on an ISO 22028-5 reference HDR monitor.

When a supported HDR format is detected, images are processed with the appropriate gain maps and evaluated through our HDR visualization pipeline using dedicated scoring criteria. If the image is in a non-HDR format or an unsupported HDR format, it is analyzed as an SDR image using the same tools, ensuring consistency and fairness across all devices.

Zoom: An increased focus on growing user features

Zoom capabilities have emerged as a key differentiator among flagship smartphones. Increasingly valued by users, zoom is now widely used across a variety of scenarios, from close and mid-range portraits to long-range landscape and wildlife photography. In recent years, we’ve observed significant advancements across devices, enabling users to capture high-quality images even in the most demanding conditions.

In response to evolving user behavior, we have redefined our zoom testing protocol with a stronger emphasis on emerging use cases, such as video zoom, which is increasingly used during live events and concerts to capture subjects from a distance.

Key evolutions in our testing include:

    • A focus on the 85–300mm zoom range, which is especially relevant for medium to long-range portrait photography.
    • Simulation of user motion
    • Evaluation criteria covering a broad set of attributes: from static elements like face exposure, contrast, dynamic range, and texture, to temporal aspects such as stabilization and autofocus consistency, as well as usability metrics like zoom smoothness.

While we’ve refined our protocol for close- to medium-range zoom, representing most of everyday use cases, ultra zoom (200 mm and beyond) continues to be evaluated through a dedicated protocol. We’ll soon publish updated results from this specialized testing.

Video: Simulating Real-Life Movement and Light

Smartphone video performance has advanced significantly in the past few years with results now getting closer to professional standards. Videos are now marked with significantly richer color, enhanced contrast and greater detail. For the past eight years, devices like the Apple iPhone have consistently set the benchmark for mobile video quality, delivering reliable performance and excellent detail retention across a wide range of lighting conditions.

To stay aligned with the rapid advancements in smartphone videography, we have significantly updated our evaluation protocols. In the sixth version of our video testing protocol, we’ve introduced several key enhancements:

    • Simulated user motion in the lab: We are the first to incorporate a protocol that evaluates video quality using captures recorded under controlled, simulated user movement bringing greater realism and reproducibility to our tests.
    • Broader range of use cases: We’ve expanded scene diversity to include a wider variety of skin tones, better reflecting real-world usage.
    • Extended lighting scenarios: Our automated lab setup now covers four distinct lighting levels (from 5 to 1000 lux), each paired with systematic HDR scene simulations. Additionally, we’ve implemented a dedicated night-shooting plan, designed to evaluate performance across a variety of low-light situations and user scenarios.

Revised Architecture and Scoring System

In the latest version of our protocol, we have revised the scoring methodology to provide a more detailed and user-relevant evaluation of device performance. The updated framework now includes two main sub-scores: Photo and Video, each assessing the performance of the device’s primary focal lengths: main, tele, and ultra-wide.

This structure offers a clearer view of how each focal length performs in both still and motion capture. Additionally, we’ve introduced use-case scores to reflect real-world scenarios, providing insights into the device’s capabilities in specific contexts such as portrait photography, zoom performance (across both photo and video), and low-light shooting—a persistently challenging condition identified in our previous research.

Initial Results from Camera v6 protocol

With the new protocol version comes an updated camera ranking, resulting in some shifts in smartphone positions compared to previous rankings.

To give you a clearer idea of what to expect, this section presents an overview of the evaluation of three popular devices.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

In our Camera v6 protocol, the iPhone 16 Pro Max is mostly impacted in our Photo score. Indeed, while fine noise has a reduced impact compared to earlier versions, faces frequently appear underexposed. This lower brightness is generally less appreciated by users, resulting in a greater negative impact on perceived exposure quality.

Highlights on the performance of the product evaluated under the v6 Camera protocol:

    • Portrait: in our new protocol, the iPhone 16 Pro Max remains an excellent choice for portrait pictures, whether capturing a single person or a group on the same focal plane. Thanks to effective HDR management, portrait images appear immersive, vibrant and visually appealing.
    • Zoom Video: Video continues to be a strong area for the iPhone 16 Pro Max under our new testing protocol. When analyzing zoom performance during video recording, the device delivers smooth transitions and maintains high image quality throughout the zoom range.
    • Lowlight: With the inclusion of more low-light and challenging scenes in our protocol, the iPhone 16 Pro Max continues to perform strongly in photo mode while remaining the top performer in video. It produces bright images with a wide dynamic range, preserving both detail and contrast even in difficult lighting conditions.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

Under our Camera v6 protocol, the Xiaomi 15 Ultra benefits from the increased emphasis on portrait color and telephoto zoom performance, resulting in a higher ranking.

Highlights on the performance of the product evaluated under the v6 Camera protocol:

    • Portrait: in our new protocol, the Xiaomi 15 Ultra was capable of capture nice portraits with realist skin tones and good exposure across all lighting conditions.
    • Zoom photo & video: The Xiaomi 15 Ultra delivers a strong performance in telephoto, keeping a high level of detail and sharpness across the entire zoom range. It also performs strongly in video zoom, offering stable and clear results.
    • Lowlight: The device provides good low-light imaging experience, featuring a warm white balance that preserves the ambient atmosphere, along with impressive noise reduction.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

In our new protocol, the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra is mostly impacted by the lower impact on noise and the growing weight of telephoto zoom.

Highlights of the performance of the product evaluated under the v6 Camera protocol:

    • Portrait: The Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra delivers strong portrait photography performance across default, bokeh, and tele modes, with good subject detail, accurate edge detection, and versatile features like realistic blur effects and adjustable lighting.
    • Zoom: The Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra offers impressive telephoto performance with sharp, detailed images across medium to long zoom ranges, supported by fast and reliable autofocus. While it delivers strong overall quality, some softness and noise appear at extreme zoom levels, placing it just behind top competitors like the Oppo Find X8 Ultra and Xiaomi 15 Ultra.
    • Lowlight: In low-light conditions, the camera generally delivered good exposure and accurate white balance, though occasional underexposure and unnatural tones were observed. Testers also noted inconsistencies in noise and detail between shots, highlighting a lack of consistency in performance across challenging lighting conditions.

Conclusion

With the launch of DXOMARK’s sixth-generation Smartphone Camera Evaluation Protocol, we reaffirm our commitment to providing the most accurate, relevant, and user-centric assessments in the mobile imaging space. By integrating cutting-edge testing tools, global user insights, and real-world use cases into our methodology, Camera v6 marks a significant step forward in how smartphone camera performance is measured. As innovation in mobile photography accelerates, this new protocol ensures our rankings remain not only scientifically robust but also truly reflective of the everyday experiences and expectations of users worldwide.

The post What’s New in DXOMARK’s Camera protocol? appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/dxomark-smartphone-camera-protocol-v6/feed/ 0 DXOMARK launches smartphone camera protocol v6 Discover how DXOMARK’s new smartphone camera protocol v6 elevates HDR, portrait, and zoom testing to deliver scores that truly reflect real-world use. DXOMARK smartphone camera protocol V6 CameraV6_keyvisual Media NewRanking_Camv6 (2) AppleiPhone16ProMax-1 FaceToFace_Xiaomi15Ultra Xiaomi 15 Ultra Camera test – Retested https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-15-ultra-camera-test-retested/ https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-15-ultra-camera-test-retested/#respond Wed, 25 Jun 2025 17:18:08 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=185417&preview=true&preview_id=185417 We put the Xiaomi 15 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 [...]

The post Xiaomi 15 Ultra Camera test – Retested appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Xiaomi 15 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: 50MP 1.0″ sensor,  3.2 µm (4-in-1) pixels,23mm equivalent f/1.63 aperture lens, OIS
  • Tele 1: 50MP, 1.4 µm (4-in-1) pixels, 70mm equivalent f/1.8-aperture lens, OIS
  • Tele 2: 200MP, 2.24 µm pixels, 100mm equivalent f/2.6-aperture lens (periscope design), OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 50MP, 1.28 µm (4-in-1) pixels, 14mm  f/2.2-aperture lens

Scoring

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

Xiaomi 15 Ultra
Xiaomi 15 Ultra
159
camera
167
Photo
Main
168

177

Bokeh
170

175

Ultra-Wide
158

Best

Tele
166

Best

143
Video
Main
149

179

Ultra-Wide
140

145

Tele
119

130

Use cases & Conditions

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

BEST 159

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 182

Outdoor

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

BEST 172

Indoor

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

BEST 146

Lowlight

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

BEST 151

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • High texture levels and low noise in photo
  • Accurate exposure and wide dynamic range in photo and video
  • Accurate color rendering and pleasant white balance in bright light photo and video
  • High levels of detail across all zoom settings
  • Fairly low noise in bright light video

Cons

  • Occasional warm color casts in photo and video
  • Limited depth of field results in blurred background faces in group shots
  • Occasional contrast issues
  • Artifacts, including ghosting and flare
  • Loss of texture in some shots, especially in low light
  • Occasional autofocus stepping
  • Less effective video stabilization than some competitors

The Xiaomi Ultra 15 delivered a very good performance in the DXOMARK Camera tests, achieving the best results of a Xiaomi device to date. The new flagship comes with impressive imaging specs, including a total of four image sensors, with pixel counts from 50MP to a whopping 200MP,  photo and video HDR modes, as well as a host of other features and modes. In terms of camera hardware, the main improvements over the predecessor are the pixel count on the long tele camera (now 200MP sensor) and the new Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite chipset.

In our photo tests, overall image quality was excellent, with a wide dynamic range, low noise and nice colors. With its consistent performance in preserving details and controlling noise, along with its ability to keep single portraits well-focused and sharp in most conditions, the device has achieved a higher ranking than its predecessor in the DXOMARK protocol.

The tele zoom is the Xiaomi’s main strength, with excellent performance across all tele-zoom settings. In our tests, the 15 Ultra achieved the best results for photo tele zoom to date and was particularly impressive at long-range tele settings. However, at the opposite end of the zoom spectrum, ultra-wide results lagged behind other flagships in some test categories. In the latest version of our protocol, as telephoto and especially long ranges performances play an increasingly important role in the user experience, the smartphone has become even more competitive within the DXOMARK rankings.

Video performance was pretty strong, too, thanks to good exposure and a wide dynamic range, nice colors and low noise. However it could not quite match the best competitors in terms of exposure and color adaptation during scene changes, autofocus, and texture. Video stabilization did a good job at keeping video footage smooth and stable, but was less effective than on the best flagship models, such as the Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max or the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra.

BEST 146
Lowlight

In low light, the Xiaomi 15 Ultra delivered a nice imaging experience, with the camera providing a warm white balance and impressive noise reduction. Exposure was spot on and a wide dynamic range ensured good detail in both the shadow and highlight areas of the frame. On the downside, colors could be oversaturated on occasion, and warm color casts could impact the image output. While the balance between texture retention and noise reduction was impressive for still images, low-light video footage lacked detail and fine textures. When recording video in dim conditions, our testers also noticed some exposure and color adaptation issues when the content of the scene changed.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Good exposure, saturated colors with warm cast
BEST 159
Portrait

The Xiaomi 15 Ultra was capable of capturing overall nice portrait shots, with realistic skin tones and good exposure across all light conditions. Still portraits also had high levels of fine detail. The camera’s main drawback in terms of portraiture was its narrow depth of field, which made it difficult to keep all subjects in group shots in focus. Subjects towards the back of a group scene were often blurry.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Portraits feature nice colors, good exposure and wide dynamic range
BEST 151
Zoom

Xiaomi’s telephoto performance,  is among the strongest in the market, offering excellent detail retention, and sharpness, across a wide zoom range. The periscope tele lens delivers clear and vibrant images, even at long distances. Autofocus is fast and accurate, ensuring sharp subjects in both bright and low-light conditions. Noise is well controlled, and HDR processing helps maintain good dynamic range in challenging scenes. While extreme zoom levels can still show some softness, Xiaomi’s telephoto cameras generally perform better than many competitors, providing reliable, high-quality zoom shots that excel in both everyday and demanding photographic scenarios

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where 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 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 15 Ultra Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo 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

167

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

170

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as 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, landscape and zoom 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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

168

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

177

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
Xiaomi 15 Ultra Photo scores
The photo Main 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 at 1x.

The 15 Ultra delivered an excellent performance in photo mode, making it a great option for any ambitious stills photographer. The HDR format delivered very good contrast and a wide dynamic range, ensuring good exposure and nice color rendering. The level of captured detail was excellent, preserving fine detail with a natural look, without oversharpening. In addition, noise levels were low, even when shooting in low light. This made for an excellent texture/noise trade-off.

Colors were generally nice, with natural skin tones in portrait shots. However, our testers also noticed some local contrast issues in scenes with strong backlighting often being to high and leading to lost information on faces. While the autofocus was mostly reliable and stable, the camera’s primary camera has a very wide aperture, which is great for light collection, but the resulting narrow depth of field made it difficult to keep all subjects in group shots in focus. People at the back were often out of focus.

Close-Up

In our tests, the 15 Ultra’s close-up mode did a very good job, capturing good levels of details at close distance. A slight loss of sharpness could be observed at very close shooting distances, but this is similar on most competing devices.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Good details, accurate exposure, and saturated colors
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Good detail, accurate exposure, and natural colors
Exposure
118

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

131

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

The Xiaomi delivered very well-exposed pictures in most conditions. Exposure was also very stable and spot-on for portrait, landscape, and still-life shots alike. The camera’s wide dynamic range allowed for good image quality in difficult high-contrast conditions, including strongly backlit scenes. Xiaomi’s HDR rendering was capable of creating nice contrast, tough sometimes slightly strong for users.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Accurate exposure, wide dynamic range, and nice contrast
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Accurate exposure, wide dynamic range, and good contrast
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Accurate exposure, wide dynamic range, and good contrast
Color
130

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

Best

i

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 according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

The 15 Ultra comes with Xiaomi’s signature color rendering, providing neutral but saturated colors in most conditions. Colors were nice, with neutral white balance and accurate skin tones when taking pictures in bright light. Under typical indoor conditions and in low light, colors remained saturated, but our testers observed some, mostly warm, color casts that appears to be well tolerated by users in our Insights studies.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Nice skin tones, saturated colors, warm white balance
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Nice skin tones, natural colors, neutral white balance
Autofocus
117

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

126

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

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.

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as 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 in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. 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.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Diana setup: 10000Lux Δ0EV D55 Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 10000 Lux with D55 illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Eugene setup: 5Lux Δ0EV 2700K Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 5 Lux with LED 2700K illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

Unlike its predecessor, the  14 Ultra, the Xiaomi 15 Ultra is capable of delivering zero shutter lag with a reliable autofocus. We noticed very few autofocus failures in bright light, but when shooting in low light, the autofocus could be slower than the best-in-class devices. Overall the autofocus was quite stable across consecutive shots, with focus reliably locking onto the subject. This said, the primary camera’s quite narrow depth of field meant that subjects not in the focal plane could be out of focus.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Good focus on front subject, background subject out of focus
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Good focus on front subject, background subject slightly out of focus
Texture
129

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

131

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for 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.

The Xiaomi 15 Ultra captured high levels of detail in most conditions, especially when shooting in bright light. Fine detail was preserved well, without being oversharpened, for a natural look of textures. Texture performance in bright light was equal to, or even better than on the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra, but fine detail looked slightly more natural. This said, some detail was lost in low-light shooting. In addition, motion blur was often noticeable on moving subjects in low light.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Outdoor detail
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Very fine detail
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Outdoor detail
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Good detail
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Outdoor detail
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Loss of fine detail
Noise
127

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10000 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
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.

Image noise was well under control in most shooting conditions, with only some barely noticeable fine luminance noise in outdoor and indoor scenes. Even in low light, noise was hardly noticeable, with images retaining good levels of detail.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Low light noise
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Very fine luminance noise
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Low light noise
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Luminance noise
Artifacts
76

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

80

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, 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

Bokeh

170

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

175

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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.

The Xiaomi 15 Ultra’s bokeh mode captured natural-looking images. Subject isolation was mostly natural, with a soft-looking simulated aperture and natural blur gradient. However, some depth estimation artifacts could be noticeable, in addition to some slight exposure and artifact instabilities across consecutive shots. Thanks to its impressive zoom performances, Bokeh usually provided very sharp faces in comparison to Huawei Pura 70 Ultra and even more Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max making it one of our best contester on this feature, along with Oppo Find X8 Ultra.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Soft bokeh effects, slight depth artifacts.
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Natural bokeh effect, very slight depth artifacts
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Natural simulated aperture, very slight depth artifacts

Tele

166

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

Best

i

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.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

Zoom performance is the Xiaomi 15 Ultra’s main strong point. Thanks to the combination of two tele modules (50MP and 200MP periscope), the 15 Ultra offered very high levels of tele zoom detail, from the primary camera to the long-range tele. Its camera modules delivered impressive levels of detail from close to long-range tele, outperforming even the best competitors in bright light. In addition, image noise was well under control, earning the Xiaomi the top score in the tele zoom category. On the downside, some slight highlight clipping could be noticeable in difficult conditions, for example backlit scenes. We also observed a reduction of detail in low light, but overall tele zoom performance was impressive.

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
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
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
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.
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Long-range tele
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Very good detail
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Long-range tele
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Loss of detail
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Long-range tele
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Loss of detail

UltraWide

158

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

Best

i

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.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

The 15 Ultra’s 13mm/50MP ultra-wide camera delivered good image quality overall. Distortion on ultra-wide shots was fairly well under control, exposure was mostly accurate and, despite the occasional color cast, colors were nice. Detail levels could be a little low in some conditions. Fine detail was lost, especially in low-light scenes. Our testers also observed some image noise in indoor and low-light shots.

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
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
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
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.
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Ultra-wide
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Loss of fine detail, good exposure, warm color rendering
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Ultra-wide
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Loss of fine detail, good exposure, neutral white balance
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Ultra-wide
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Loss of detail, good exposure, neutral white balance

Video

143

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

166

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 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 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

149

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

179

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
Xiaomi 15 Ultra Video scores
Video Main 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.

The Xiaomi 15 Ultra video mode offers a range of resolution and frame rate settings, up to 8K/30fps and 4K/120fps. Dolby Vision 10-bit HDR recording is available at 4K/60fps and at 1080p resolution settings. The DXOMARK video tests were performed at 4K/60fps with Dolby Vision HDR, which provided the overall best results with image stabilization.

With these settings in our tests, the 15 Ultra delivered good video quality, with good exposure and nice colors. However, it lagged slightly behind the best competitors in terms of detail, noise, and stabilization. Our testers also occasionally found video recording to be slightly unstable, with exposure and color adaptation issues in changing scenes, as well as some autofocus instabilities with stepping.

Exposure
107

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

123

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

 

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

Video exposure was accurate, and the dynamic range of recorded footage was wide in most conditions. We did observe some highlight clipping when shooting in low-light settings, but the Xiaomi’s main area for improvement in terms of video exposure was adaptation to scene changes. Instabilities were noticeable when the content or lighting of a scene changed quickly, and exposure had to adapt.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Accurate exposure, wide dynamic range, very slight adaptation issues

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Accurate exposure, wide dynamic range
Color
106

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

126

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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.

When recording in bright light, the Xiaomi 15 Ultra delivered accurate and nice color rendering with a neutral white balance. In outdoor settings and under typical indoor lighting, our testers found white balance to be mostly neutral with saturated colors. However, like for exposure, some adaptation issues were noticeable, mostly in low light. In addition, low-light white balance was often very warm, resulting in an overall slightly unnatural color rendering of the scene.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Nice colors, white balance adaptation issues

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Nice colors, neutral white balance

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Nice colors, warm white balance
Autofocus
94

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

124

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
i

For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.

Video autofocus was generally fast and reliable in most conditions. However, occasionally the autofocus struggled to adapt to changes in the scene and could lock onto the wrong target. We also noticed some slight autofocus stepping, making transitions less smooth than on the best-in-class rivals.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Fast autofocus, slight instabilities at 11.5s

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Accurate and reliable autofocus

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Accurate and reliable autofocus
Texture
111

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

116

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

While detail was excellent when taking still images with the primary and tele-zoom cameras, the Xiaomi struggled slightly with detail capture in video mode. Levels of detail were quite high when recording in bright light, but dropped under indoor conditions and in low light, with a noticeable loss of fine detail. In very low light, scene integrity artifacts (slightly moving texture patches) could further reduce texture quality.

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.
Noise
107

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

124

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Video noise levels were well-controlled in bright light, but some shadow noise could be noticeable. In low-light recordings, noise was more intrusive, with chroma noise creeping in. Overall, noise was more noticeable than on the best rivals in the 15 Ultra’s class.

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.
Stabilization
108

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

122

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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.

Video stabilization was quite effective but not quite up to the same level as the best competitors. Camera shake was still noticeable in many recordings, both when holding the camera still and when walking or running during recording. Slight sharpness differences between frames could be seen in low-light footage.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Residual motion is visible

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Very good stabilization

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Very good stabilization
Artifacts
83

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

87

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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

UltraWide

140

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

145

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 30 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

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
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
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
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.

Tele

119

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

130

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 50 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

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
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
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
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.

The Xiaomi 15 Ultra delivers pleasant video zoom performance, as it offers excellent detail retention, sharpness, and natural color reproduction across various zoom levels, allowing versatile framing without significant quality loss. Autofocus is smooth and reliable in both bright and low-light conditions, ensuring consistently sharp subjects. While some softness and noise can appear at extreme zoom distances, especially in challenging lighting, the Xiaomi 15 Ultra remains one of the top performers in video zoom, though it faces strong competition from other flagship devices pushing the limits of long-range video quality. The device is mostly impacted by its lowlight performances where it struggles to preserve the quality visible in brighter light conditions. Overall, it provides strong performances, but still behind key competitors like Oppo Find X8 Ultra and Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max.

The post Xiaomi 15 Ultra Camera test – Retested appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-15-ultra-camera-test-retested/feed/ 0 Xiaomi 15 Ultra Best Best CarOnBoardgame_Xiaomi15Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 FaceToFace_Xiaomi15Ultra FlowerMacro_Xiaomi15Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 FlowerMacro_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 BushWindow_Xiaomi15Ultra BushWindow_HuaweiPura70Ultra BushWindow_AppleiPhone16ProMax Best Lightbulb_Xiaomi15Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 Lightbulb_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 DuoTable_Xiaomi15Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 DuoTable_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 GridTouch_Xiaomi15Ultra GridTouch_Xiaomi15Ultra GridTouch_AppleiPhone16ProMax Best Best Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra Camera test – Retested https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s25-ultra-camera-test-retested/ https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s25-ultra-camera-test-retested/#respond Wed, 25 Jun 2025 17:17:35 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=185414&preview=true&preview_id=185414 We put the Samsung Galaxy S25 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 [...]

The post Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra Camera test – Retested appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Samsung Galaxy S25 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 1/1.3″ sensor, 24mm equivalent f/1.7-aperture lens, multi-directional PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 50MP sensor, 120˚ f/1.9-aperture lens, dual pixel PDAF, Super Steady video
  • Tele 1: 10MP 1/3.52″ sensor, 67mm equivalent f/2.4-aperture lens, PDAF, OIS
  • Tele 2: 50MP 1/2.52″ sensor, 111mm equivalent f/3.4-aperture lens, (periscope design), PDAF, OIS

Scoring

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

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
151
camera
152
Photo
Main
155

177

Bokeh
165

175

Ultra-Wide
146

158

Tele
140

166

150
Video
Main
155

179

Ultra-Wide
145

Best

Tele
130

Best

Use cases & Conditions

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

BEST 159

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 182

Outdoor

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

BEST 172

Indoor

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

BEST 146

Lowlight

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

BEST 151

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Good detail in zoom shots, especially at long range
  • Good exposure and wide dynamic range in bright light video
  • Good photo and video detail in most conditions
  • Natural skin tones in non-challenging scenes
  • Natural video color rendering with neutral white balance in bright light and indoors

Cons

  • Some autofocus instabilities in video mode
  • Exposure adaptation issues in video
  • Noticeable noise in low-light videos
  • Noticeable noise, especially in high-contrast and low-light photos
  • Occasional white balance casts, especially in low light
  • Occasional activation failures in bokeh mode

 

The Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra delivered a solid performance in the DXOMARK Camera tests but was unable to secure a position among the very best in our ranking. An upgraded chipset (Snapdragon 8 Elite vs Snapdragon 8 Gen 2) and a higher pixel count on the ultra-wide camera (50MP vs 12MP) aside, the camera hardware specifications are very similar to the predecessor Galaxy S24 Ultra. Imaging performance improvements over the predecessor were only modest, despite slight improvements in software processing and some additional AI features.

While the S25 Ultra maintained its predecessor’s solid overall image quality, some issues were noticeable. In bright light, our testers observed some slight highlight clipping. While the camera produced vivid colors with natural skin tones in most tested scenes, we noticed occasional white balance shifts that resulted in slight color casts especially in low light. Image noise was one of the S25 Ultra’s main areas for improvement, with grain particularly noticeable in high-contrast and low-light scenes. Our testers also observed some noise reduction instabilities across consecutive shots. In terms of detail, the S25 Ultra’s sharpness was slightly better than last year’s model in lowlight conditions. When tested under our new DXOMARK Camera v6 protocol, the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra revealed more clearly its limitations in meeting user preferences, particularly in challenging scenes. The device often produced low-contrast images, and its HDR processing occasionally failed, leading to inconsistent rendering of color, contrast, and noise. These shortcomings became even more noticeable in portrait photography, where skin tones shifts toward colder hues, such as pink or purple, particularly under mixed or difficult lighting. While the S25 Ultra performs well in many scenarios, these issues prevent it from consistently delivering the level of image quality expected from a flagship device, especially when compared to the best-in-class performers.

In our zoom tests, the Samsung stood out at long-range tele settings, but also provided good image quality at close and medium range. The new ultrawide camera with its higher resolution sensor matched the image quality of the predecessor.

Like for stills, the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra did not introduce any groundbreaking improvements in overall video performance. This said, video results remained strong. The camera was taking full advantage of its HDR capabilities to provide video footage with well-balanced highlights and shadows. In good light, video detail levels were high, with accurate exposure management and natural colors, making for an overall pleasant viewing experience. However, some struggles became apparent in dimmer conditions, with more intrusive noise, particularly in the shadows, and some quite pronounced color casts. Our testers also noticed objectionable autofocus and exposure adaptation instabilities. Video stabilization remained largely unchanged from the previous generation, providing a reliable experience. This said, it did not quite match the level of smoothness of the best-in-class iPhone 16 Pro Max.

BEST 146
Lowlight

While in low light, most photos were exposed well, but in some scenes, subjects could be slightly underexposed. Our testers also observed noise and detail inconsistencies between consecutive shots when shooting in low-light scenes. White balance was generally accurate but could appear unnatural at times under challenging illuminants. Overall, the camera provided good rendering but lacked consistency across lighting conditions, particularly in terms of noise and exposure accuracy.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Good exposure and wide dynamic range, slight warm color cast
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Slight underexposure, noise, motion blur, and ghosting on moving subjects in low light
BEST 159
Portrait

The Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra delivers strong portrait photography performance across default, bokeh, and tele modes, with good subject detail, accurate edge detection, and versatile features like realistic blur effects and adjustable lighting. However, while results are generally pleasing, portrait images can sometimes appear flat due to low contrast, especially in challenging lighting conditions. Additionally, color rendering is not always consistent, with occasional skin tone shifts, affecting the natural look of the subject. In HDR scenes, visible processing artifacts may lead to contrast inconsistencies and tonal imbalances, particularly in high-dynamic-range backgrounds. Although the S25 Ultra performs well overall, when pushed in difficult portrait scenarios, it falls slightly behind top competitors such as the Oppo Find X8 Ultra, which maintains better tonal precision, color accuracy, and rendering stability under the same conditions.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – High contrast on HDR display, nice skin tones
BEST 151
Zoom

The Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra delivers impressive telephoto performance, leveraging its versatile periscope zoom system to provide sharp, detailed images at medium to long zoom levels (up to 10×). It maintains good texture and contrast, making it well-suited for capturing distant subjects and portraits with natural perspective compression. Autofocus is fast and reliable across zoom ranges. However, at the extreme telephoto end, some softness and noise become more noticeable, especially in low-light conditions, and fine detail retention can drop compared to competitors. Overall, the S25 Ultra’s telephoto module balances versatility and image quality effectively, though it occasionally falls short of the very best zoom performance found in rivals like the Oppo Find X8 Ultra and Xiaomi 15 Ultra.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where 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 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.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo 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

152

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

170

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as 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, landscape and zoom 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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

155

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

177

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra Photo scores
The photo Main 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 at 1x.

While the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra’s camera hardware remains largely unchanged from the S24 Ultra and the new model uses a very similar HDR rendering process as its predecessor, our testers did occasionally observe a slight performance regression on the new model, for example in terms of exposure and noise.

When viewed on a compatible display, the S25 Ultra’s HDR images were vibrant and pleasantly bright, with generally pleasant brightness in non-challenging scenes. However, highlight clipping could be more noticeable than on the S24 Ultra. White balance was neutral, but color casts could make an appearance, mostly in low-light or night scenes. Apart from some exceptions in low light and night conditions were it struggles to preserve fine details the S25 Ultra is usually able to retain texture from the scenes. However, image noise was more pronounced than on the predecessor, particularly in high-contrast scenes with strong backlighting.

Close-Up

The Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra offers solid macro photography capabilities, allowing users to capture close-up shots with good detail and sharpness at short distances. Its autofocus system performs reliably in macro mode, helping to keep small subjects crisp and well-defined. Color reproduction remains natural, and noise is generally well-controlled in good lighting conditions. However, the device sometimes struggles with depth-of-field management in very close shots, occasionally resulting in parts of the subject falling out of focus. In challenging lighting or extremely tight macro scenarios, slight softness and noise can become more apparent.

Exposure
125

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

131

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

The Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra delivered a decent performance in the exposure category, benefiting from Samsung’s HDR format and image processing.  Overall performance was close to the predecessor, but our testers noted a slight regression in certain scenes. For example, in challenging light conditions, highlight clipping was more noticeable. While colors appeared more vibrant, they occasionally veered towards being overly saturated, resulting in a slightly unnatural appearance in some instances.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Highlight clipping, white balance cast, slightly unnatural background colors, strong noise on subjects
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra –  White balance cast, noise on subjects
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Neutral white balance, noise on models

Color
119

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

130

Xiaomi 15 Ultra

i

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 according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

In terms of color rendering and white balance, our testers observed noticeable differences to the S24 Ultra, and the color reproduction has set debate over our Insights studies showing that a large set of panelists often rejected Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra for its color reproduction. Colors were generally nice when capturing bright outdoor scenes, but color casts could result in a slightly unnatural look, especially in low light.

 

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra –  Warm cast
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Cool cast
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Accurate white balance, natural skin tones
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Green cast
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra –  Orange/pink cast
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Orange cast

Autofocus
107

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

126

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

i

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.

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as 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 in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. 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.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Diana setup: 10000Lux Δ0EV D55 Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 10000 Lux with D55 illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Eugene setup: 5Lux Δ0EV 2700K Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 5 Lux with LED 2700K illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

During autofocus testing, our experts noticed that the delay between pressing the shutter and capturing the image had been reduced when compared to the S24 Ultra, across a variety of shooting conditions but particularly in high-contrast scenes. The autofocus was precise and stable. However, the depth of field could occasionally be shallower than on the S24 Ultra, resulting in a blurrier middle plane (background model in the shots below) in some shots.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Front face in focus, background face out of focus
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Front face in focus, background face out of focus
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Front face in focus, background face out of focus

Texture
121

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

131

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

i

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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for 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.

 

Overall, the level of detail captured by the S25 Ultra camera was quite comparable to the S24 Ultra. However, in some of our test scenes, the S25 Ultra preserved better detail, particularly in low light.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Low light detail
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Very good detail
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Low light detail
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Good detail
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Low light detail
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Slight loss of detail
Noise
105

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10000 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
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.

 

In bright light, image noise was well under control. However, in scenes with strong backlighting and in low light, noise was more intrusive than on the S24 Ultra. In addition, our experts noticed unpleasant chroma noise and some noise reduction instabilities across consecutive shots of the same scene when shooting high-contrasted scenes.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Noise in backlit scenes
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Visible noise on the subject
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Noise in backlit scenes
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Noticeable noise on the subject
Apple Iphone 16 Pro Max - Noise in backlit scene
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Noticeable noise on the subject
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Low light noise
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Chromatic noise noticeable when zooming in
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Low light noise
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Noise slightly noticeable when zooming in
Apple Iphone 16 Pro Max - Low light noise
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Noise slightly noticeable when zooming in
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Image of a series of consecutive shots
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Different shot of the same series – instability in processing is impacting the rendering of details, contrast, and color.

 

Artifacts
73

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

80

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, 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

Bokeh

165

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

175

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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.

 

Like the S24 Ultra, the S25 Ultra uses its short telephoto camera in bokeh mode. The longer focal length, with its compressed perspective, proves to be a better option for capturing portrait images when compared to the wide-angle lenses used by many competitors. In our tests, bokeh performance was very similar to that of its predecessor, with good subject isolation. This said, we found the feature to be somewhat unstable. The bokeh effect did not work every time.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Good subject isolation, foreground blur
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Good subject isolation, foreground blur
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Very good subject isolation, foreground blur
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Consecutive shots – Bokeh effect triggered
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Consecutive shots – No bokeh effect, instability in color processing

Tele

140

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

166

Xiaomi 15 Ultra
i

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.

The Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra features a dual optical zoom setup, with 3x and 5x magnifications. In our zoom tests, the Samsung provided reliable image quality at close and medium range settings. Long range was exceptional, capturing high levels of detail, especially when shooting in bright light. In low light conditions, noise could be quite noticeable, though. When using the tele zoom, performance was generally good at close and medium-range settings, but in some scenes, our testers noticed a slight lack of detail. The device really started to shine after switching to the 5x zoom module. This is when long-range performance significantly improved, delivering very good texture and clarity in distant subjects when shooting in bright conditions.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.
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
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
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
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.
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Long range
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Very good detail
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Long range
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Good detail
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Long range
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Good detail

UltraWide

146

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

158

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

i

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 Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra features a new 50MP ultra-wide camera that maintains the same field of view as on previous models. In our tests, the image output was very similar to the S24 Ultra in terms of exposure and color, but we noticed that noise on the other hand was managed better and less intrusive, especially when shooting indoors or in low light. The device does not always get the best of its new 50MP sensor, and some images in bright light conditions actually showed a level of detail very close to what was seen on S24 Ultra.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.
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
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
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
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.
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Accurate target exposure, noise well controlled on face and slightly visible in the field
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra- Accurate target exposure, visible noise on face and strong noise in the field
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Accurate target exposure, visible fine luminance noise overall

Video

150

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

166

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 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 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

155

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

179

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra Video scores
Video Main 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.

The Samsung S25 Ultra offers a range of video resolutions and frame rates, including 8K at 24/30fps, 4K at 30/60/120fps, and 1080p at 30/60/240fps. Additionally, it supports 10-bit HDR, in HDR10 HLG format, unlike its predecessor, which offered HDR10+ PQ format. Our tests were performed at 4K resolution, 60fps and with HDR10 activated. Overall quality was good, offering a wide dynamic range and neutral, accurate colors when recording in bright light. However, some noise became noticeable in low light, as well as some occasional undesirable autofocus and exposure instabilities.

Exposure
95

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

123

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

In our video tests, the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra delivered accurate target exposure on faces across a variety of light conditions, ensuring well-balanced brightness levels in most scenes. Dynamic range was wide, effectively preserving detail in both highlight and shadow portions of the frame. However, in particularly challenging high-contrast scenes, slight highlight clipping could be noticeable. Additionally, exposure adaptation when transitioning between different lighting conditions could occasionally be abrupt.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Accurate target exposure, wide dynamic range

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Accurate target exposure, wide dynamic range

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Accurate target exposure on face, wide dynamic range
Color
115

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

126

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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.

The Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra provided neutral white balance and accurate color rendering in bright light, ensuring natural and well-balanced tones. White balance remained stable across various scenes, contributing to color consistency and pleasant skin tone rendering. However, in low light, a slight warm color cast could be noticeable, along with a mild desaturation. This could impact overall color vibrancy in darker scenes.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Pleasant color rendering, neutral white balance. A slight target exposure instability is noticeable.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Pleasant color rendering, neutral white balance.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Pleasant color rendering, warmer white balance.
Autofocus
101

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

124

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
i

For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.

The Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra features a responsive and precise autofocus system, ensuring accurate focus on faces in bright light conditions. In our tests, the autofocus was generally fast, providing sharp and well-defined subjects. However, in low light, our testers noticed occasional autofocus failures, with the focus sometimes locking onto the wrong target. We also observed some focus stepping, resulting in less smooth transitions than on some competitors.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Smooth focus, refocusing on subject to the left

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Smooth and accurate focus

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Smooth and accurate focus
Texture
111

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

116

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

The Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra captured very good detail when recording in bright light, preserving fine textures and intricate details with high accuracy. Sharpness was well-balanced, providing a natural look without excessive processing. However, in low light, some artifacts with local floating texture could become visible, slightly affecting the overall image quality in darker scenes.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – High levels of detail, natural sharpening

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Good levels of detail, slightly oversharpening

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Very high levels of detail, natural sharpening
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.
Noise
112

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

124

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Video noise was well under control and pretty much not noticeable in bright light. However, noise became more intrusive when recording low-light scenes, appearing stronger than on the S24 Ultra. This could impact image quality in darker scenes, particularly in areas of plain color or in the shadow portions of the frame.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Strong shadow noise, blue dots

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Shadow noise

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Shadow 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.
Stabilization
118

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

122

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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.

The Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra offered very good video stabilization when holding the camera still and when in motion during recording. Camera shake was effectively counteracted, resulting in smooth footage. However, slight residual camera motion could still be observed and overall stabilization performance was similar to the S24 Ultra. While the Samsung’s stabilization was reliable, it was not as impressive as on the latest iPhone models, especially with more dynamic camera motion.

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Effective stabilization, occasional slightly abrupt corrections, some floating texture artifacts.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Effective stabilization, occasional slightly abrupt corrections, some jellow artifacts.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Effective stabilization, very smooth
Artifacts
86

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

87

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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

UltraWide

145

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

Best

i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 30 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

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
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
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
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.

Tele

130

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

Best

i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 50 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

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
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
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
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.

The Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra delivers strong video zoom performance on both its ultra-wide and telephoto lenses. The ultra-wide video captures extensive scenes with good detail and stable exposure, though slight softness and distortion can appear towards the edges, especially in low light. Autofocus is generally smooth. The telephoto video excels at medium zoom levels, offering good detail retention, effective stabilization, and natural color rendering. However, at higher zoom ranges, some loss of sharpness and increased noise become noticeable, particularly in challenging lighting. Switches between different camera modules are still visible, showing slight steps. In bright light the device achieve fairly satisfying performances compared to competitors.

The post Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra Camera test – Retested appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s25-ultra-camera-test-retested/feed/ 0 Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra Best Best ArtOnTablet_SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra (2) SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra BacklitGroup_SamsungGalaxyS24Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 BacklitGroup_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 Liana_SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 Liana_SamsungGalaxyS24Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 Liana_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 FlashOffWellWest_SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 FlashOffWellWest_SamsungGalaxyS24Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 FlashOffWellWest_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 SidetoSideGroup_SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 240 (4) 240 (4) SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra 060 (2) CafetShrub_SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra_DxOMark_06-00 CafetShrub_SamsungGalaxyS24Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 CafetShrub_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra 18mm_SofaPortrait_SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 18mm_SofaPortrait_SamsungGalaxyS24Ultra_DxOMark_06-00 18mm_SofaPortrait_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 Best Best Google Pixel 9 Pro XL Camera test – Retested https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-9-pro-xl-camera-test-retested/ https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-9-pro-xl-camera-test-retested/#respond Wed, 25 Jun 2025 17:17:27 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=184339&preview=true&preview_id=184339 We put the Google Pixel 9 Pro XL 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 [...]

The post Google Pixel 9 Pro XL Camera test – Retested appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Google Pixel 9 Pro XL 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 1/1.31″ sensor,  f/1.68-aperture lens, 82° field of view, OctaPD, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 48MP sensor, 1/2.55″ sensor, f/1.7-aperture lens, 123° field of view, Quad PDAF
  • Tele: 48MP sensor, 1/2.55″ sensor, f/2.8-aperture lens, 22° field of view, Quad PD, 5x optical zoom

Scoring

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


Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
160
camera
163
Photo
Main
170

177

Bokeh
155

175

Ultra-Wide
157

158

Tele
145

166

155
Video
Main
168

179

Ultra-Wide
136

145

Tele
111

130

Use cases & Conditions

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

BEST 159

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 182

Outdoor

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

BEST 172

Indoor

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

BEST 146

Lowlight

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

BEST 151

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Good exposure and highlight protection in most conditions
  • Generally neutral white balance and nice colors
  • Fast and reliable autofocus in video, benefits from field of view correction mode when focus target changes
  • Good texture/noise trade-off in bright light, good fine detail in bright light and indoors, as well as in zoom and macro shots
  • Good video stabilization in static and moving shots
  • Photo and video artifacts well under control

Cons

  • Dynamic range instabilities across consecutive shots, slight exposure stepping in video
  • Underexposure, slightly inaccurate color rendering and chroma noise in very low light
  • Occasional fusion artifacts at medium-range tele settings
  • Depth estimation artifacts in bokeh mode
  • Sharpness differences between video frames when walking while recording, especially indoors or in low light

 

The Google Pixel 9 Pro XL did very well in the DXOMARK Camera tests, taking it very close to the top of our ranking. Our testers found the latest Google flagship to be a very versatile device that was capable of producing excellent image and video quality across a variety of shooting conditions.

With a new HDR imaging pipeline, images have a more true-to-life aspect, with optimized exposure, a more accurate tone-mapping, and sharper images on everyday scenes.

Its colors, accurate skin tones and very wide dynamic range were outstanding, making for excellent portrait and landscape still and video shots alike. The fast and reliable autofocus system kept the subject in focus in most conditions though some face detection issues did impact autofocus performances on our new AFHDR Portrait setup. Good detail was maintained up to long range tele zoom shots and image quality in general was good across the entire zoom range. Effective video stabilization made for smooth footage and, like for stills, our testers observed very few video artifacts.

In addition, as an AI-powered camera, the Google Pixel 9 Pro XL integrates a wide array of AI features, making it one of the most advanced smartphones to date. Its Video Boost functionality almost gives a cinematic rendering with better-handled stabilization, almost no visible noise, and very nice color rendering. In addition, the Super Res Zoom Video feature enables high-quality zoom up to 20x without loss of detail. Thus, image quality is now helped with AI tools while preserving a pleasant and realistic rendering.

Although our computed score corresponds to the device’s image quality without the AI features, further down in this article, we provide a specific case study of the Video Boost mode.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Good exposure, nice colors and skin tones

BEST 146
Lowlight

The Pixel 9 Pro XL is a great option for taking pictures and recording video in low light, thanks to good exposure, accurate white balance, nice color rendering, accurate autofocus and few artifacts. However, compared to the very best devices, texture was low and noise levels were high, especially in terms of chroma noise.

 Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Good exposure but some chroma noise in the shadow portions of the frame and local loss of texture
BEST 159
Portrait

In our tests, the Google Pixel 9 Pro XL made it among the very best devices in our Portrait category. It relies on efficient exposure strategy with pleasant brightness of the faces and well balanced contrast in most conditions. Skin tones are well represented for all, though some challenging conditions might provoke color shifts on faces rarely. In bright conditions, noise remains under control and details are very well preserved, still dimmer environments sometimes lead to visible chroma noise and texture non-uniformity.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Well exposed face and vivid color
BEST 151
Zoom

When shooting with the Google Pixel 9 Pro XL, the device delivers a consistently high level of image quality across most zoom ranges, enhancing the overall user experience. Its telephoto module, with an equivalent focal length of approximately 110mm, captures sharp, well-exposed images at 5x zoom with vivid color rendering.

At around 2x zoom, the Pixel 9 Pro XL employs digital zoom by cropping the main sensor. While this results in slightly reduced detail and increased noise compared to the native focal length, the image quality remains satisfactory for most users. As zoom levels increase between 3x and 5x, the device applies advanced processing techniques to maintain image sharpness and detail, achieving strong performance relative to competitors. Beyond 5x zoom, the telephoto module takes over, producing bright and sharp images. Although the Pixel 9 Pro XL’s telephoto capabilities lag behind some leading devices in the DXOMARK database, such as the Xiaomi 15 Ultra, which preserves more detail, it still offers an excellent zoom experience for most users.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Sharp portrait with fine luminance noise

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where 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 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.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo 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

163

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

170

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as 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, landscape and zoom 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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

170

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

177

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL Photo scores
The photo Main 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 at 1x.

In our tests, the Pixel 9 Pro XL made it among the very best devices for still images capture. Photos had accurate target exposure and a very wide dynamic range, with the Pixel capturing better highlight detail than its competitors in many of our test scenes. In addition, the camera produced accurate white balance and nice colors, allowing for beautiful portrait shots under a variety of light conditions. The autofocus worked reliably and zero shutter lag technology allowed for instant capture of the decisive moment. The high levels of captured detail benefitted portrait shots and landscape images alike.

As one would expect, image quality suffered slightly in difficult conditions, such as backlit scenes or very low light, with some chroma noise creeping in. Our testers also observed some dynamic range inconsistencies across a series of consecutive shots in some scenes.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Nice colors, good exposure, wide dynamic range, good texture/noise trade-off

 

Close-Up

Like many rivals, the Google Pixel 9 Pro XL uses its ultra-wide module for capturing macro images. In practice this means you have to get very close to the subject in order to capture a frame-filling shot. Image quality in macro mode was on par with the predecessor Pixel 8 Pro and the direct rivals in the Ultra Premium segment. Close-up footage shows nice very image quality with pleasant color and accurate target.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Good detail preservation and nice close-up rendering. Rather neutral white balance in this scene
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Good detail and realistic close-up rendering. Slight green cast is visible in this scene
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Good detail, use of tele camera results in better subject isolation. Slight orange cast is visible in this scene
Exposure
129

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

131

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. 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 Google Pixel 9 Pro XL captured photos with an accurate target exposure and a very wide dynamic range, down to low light. Compared to the Pixel 8 Pro, target exposure has been improved and is now on par with the best in class. The new model was particularly outstanding in terms of highlight retention. Even in difficult backlit scenes, it was capable of protecting the highlights in the brightest parts of the background while maintaining good exposure on the foreground. Like most devices, the Pixel 9 Pro XL still struggles with some loss of contrast on faces in high dynamic range scenes, despite the enhanced dynamic range offered by HDR. However, it delivers a better trade-off than its competitor, the Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max, by prioritizing facial brightness over contrast.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Accurate exposure, wide dynamic range with excellent highlight retention. Accurate target exposure on both models in this scene, loss of contrast on the faces
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Accurate exposure but limited highlight retention in background and slightly low contrast on subject and rather low target exposure on deep model subject in this scene
Google Pixel 8 Pro – Accurate exposure but limited highlight retention in background. Accurate target exposure on both models in this scene, loss of contrast on faces

Dynamic range could be slightly inconsistent across a series of consecutive shots, though, with some highlight clipping in some images.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Good highlight detail in the sky in 4 out of 5 images
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Highlight clipping in the sky in 1 out of 5 images

When shooting in very low light without flash in night mode, our testers sometimes found images to be underexposed.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL -Subject strongly underexposed, face too dark on this scene
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Good face exposure but visible yellow-green cast on this scene
Google Pixel 8 Pro – Subject strongly underexposed, face too dark and slight pink cast on this scene
Color
123

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

130

Xiaomi 15 Ultra
i

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 according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Color rendering was excellent in both portrait and landscape shots. A fairly neutral white balance in most test conditions ensured good portrait results across various lighting conditions.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Neutral white balance, vivid colors, pleasant skin tones
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slight cold white balance, correct skin tones, even if face is slightly underexposed in this scene
Google Pixel 8 Pro – Rather neutral white balance, pleasant skin tones
Autofocus
111

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

126

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

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.

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as 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 in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. 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.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Diana setup: 10000Lux Δ0EV D55 Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 10000 Lux with D55 illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Eugene setup: 5Lux Δ0EV 2700K Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 5 Lux with LED 2700K illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

Our testers found the Pixel 9 Pro XL’s autofocus to be fast and accurate. In addition, zero shutter lag is well implemented, allowing for easy capture of the decisive moment, without any delay after pressing the shutter button.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – No motion blur and instant capture (shutter is pressed when subject crosses the line on the ground). Target exposure is too low in this scene
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slight motion blur and instant capture (shutter is pressed when subject crosses the line on the ground). Slight blue cast is visible in this scene
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – No motion blur and instant capture (shutter is pressed when subject crosses the line on the ground). Slight orange cast is visible in this scene

Like on last year’s Pixel 8 Pro, a depth-of-field algorithm is used to recover detail on background faces. Given the algorithm’s starting material is a blurry face, this only works well to a certain extent, but it can help make a person in the background of a group shot more recognizable. In comparison, devices with a variable aperture, such as the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra, deliver better results, thanks to a real optical wide depth of field.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Limited depth of field, only foreground subject in focus but face enhancement recovers some detail on background face
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Limited depth of field, only foreground subject in focus. Slight blue cast and low contrast on the 2nd model face is visible in this scene
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Wide depth of field, both subjects in focus

Texture
122

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

131

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

i

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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for 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.

With its 1/1.31″ sensor, the Google Pixel 9 Pro XL did a good job at preserving fine detail in bright light and under indoor lighting. However, texture decreased in low light. Some competitors, especially those with larger image sensors, are capable of capturing better detail overall.

 

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Excellent detail, very fine detail visible. Slight pink cast on this scene
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Excellent detail, even better fine detail, thanks to the 24MP sensor
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Excellent detail, very fine detail visible

Under indoor lighting, the Google Pixel 9 Pro XL was outstanding at freezing motion, allowing for good detail when capturing scenes with moving subjects.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Good detail on face in motion
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Some loss of fine detail on face in motion. Target exposure is too low in this scene
Google Pixel 8 Pro – Slight motion blur but pretty good detail. Target exposure is  slightly too low in this scene

When shooting in low light, the level of detail dropped lower than on many rivals, though.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Loss of very fine detail
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Decent very fine detail, for example on eyebrows and eyelashes. Orange cast is visible in this scene
Google Pixel 8 Pro – Loss of very fine detail
Noise
121

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10000 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
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.

Noise was fairly well under control across all light conditions. Results were slightly better than on the Pixel 8 Pro and iPhone 15 Pro Max, but not on the same level as the Huawei Pura 70, which is an outstanding device in terms of image noise reduction.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Noise well under control
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slight fine luminance noise
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Noise well under control. Slight pink cast in this scene.

While the Pixel 9 Pro XL did a good job at freezing motion, image noise was often noticeable on moving elements in the scene.

In low light shots, chroma noise could sometimes creep in, especially in areas of plain color.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Luminance and chroma noise. Details are not uniform in this scene.
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slight luminance noise on the faces and in the shadows. Slightly more noise compared to competitors but details are more uniform in this scene
Google Pixel 8 Pro – Luminance and chroma noise. Loss of details on some parts in this scene
Artifacts
80

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

Best

i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, 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

In general, image artifacts were well under control on the Pixel 9 Pro XL. Our testers observed some flare with light sources within, or close to the edge of the frame, as well as moiré and some ghosting on fast-moving subjects, which are all fairly normal for a smartphone camera in this device segment. However, there were no fusion or other processing artifacts.

Bokeh

155

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

175

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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.

When shooting in bokeh mode, the shape and intensity of the bokeh and background spotlights were fairly natural. However, some slight subject segmentation issues meant the Pixel could not quite keep up with the very best in class.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Slight segmentation inaccuracies on hair and shirt
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Accurate segmentation
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Excellent segmentation, with even fine strands of hair visible

Tele

145

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

166

Xiaomi 15 Ultra
i

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.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

With a 110mm equivalent focal length in its tele camera, the Google Pixel 9 Pro XL is a great option for smartphone photographers who like to take pictures at long tele zoom. At the native 5x setting, tele images showed good exposure, nice color and high levels of detail. In addition, the camera was able to maintain more detail than its predecessor when zooming in even further.

Things did not look quite as good at shorter tele zoom settings, though. Between a 1x and 2x tele zoom factor, our testers observed a loss of fine detail, especially in low light. In low light, we also detected slight noise that was roughly on the same level as the Pixel 8 Pro. White balance was pleasant, and exposure was good across all zoom levels. It’s also worth noting that the camera uses image fusion methods at intermediate tele zoom levels before fully switching from the main to the tele camera. This is done to ensure a consistent level of detail across the tele zoom range.

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
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
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
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.

UltraWide

157

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

158

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

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.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

The Pixel 9 Pro XL’s ultra-wide camera uses a slightly smaller image sensor than the Pixel 8 Pro from last year. Still, thanks to optimized processing, image results were very similar, with nice colors and neutral white balance. Noise could be visible in some scenes, especially around the edges of the frame, lowering the score slightly when compared to the best in class, such as the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra.

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
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
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
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.
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Pretty good detail, slight corner softness
Google Pixel 8 Pro – Pretty good detail, slight corner softness
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Good detail. Slight yellow cast in this scene

Video

155

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

166

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 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 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

In video mode, the Google Pixel 9 Pro made it close to the top of our ranking, thanks to an accurate and stable exposure, fairly wide dynamic range, nice colors, and few artifacts. The camera captured fairly high levels of detail, and in addition, video stabilization worked effectively, both when standing still and walking while recording.  Autofocus performance was close to last year’s Pixel 8 Pro, but slightly improved. The system worked reliably, with a smooth and efficiently integrated field of view compensation, earning itself the top score to date in the video autofocus category. On the downside, noise could be quite noticeable, especially in low light, where both luminance and chroma noise could be observed.

The Google Pixel 9 Pro XL was tested in HDR mode at 4K resolution and at a frame rate of 30fps, which is the maximum frame rate in HDR mode.

Please note that a compatible HDR display is required to see the full potential of the Pixel’s HDR rendering. YouTube only displays the original HDR rendering if videos are viewed on a compatible HDR screen. Otherwise, a compressed SDR video is displayed instead.

The Google Pixel 9 Pro XL has an updated version of the Video Boost feature, which was introduced last year. Using your Google Drive account, Video Boost uploads your videos to Google servers and processes them there instead of on the phone. The video processing and other improvements can benefit from the more powerful servers than from the AI processing pipeline in the phone. The feature must be activated via the camera app and requires a network connection.

Because our protocol does not cover the cloud-based processing of images, the results of Video Boost were not included in the final score. But we ran the feature through our protocol to see how it would perform, and our testers observed a considerable improvement in the videos’ quality.

In its keynote introducing the Pixel 9 Pro XL, Google claimed to bring “the highest quality video on a smartphone.” Based on our out-of-protocol test, Video Boost provided the best video quality we have seen so far from a smartphone. For example, with the feature activated, almost no noise was visible, even in very low-light conditions, and fine detail was well preserved in all conditions, resulting in a very good texture/noise trade-off. The Video Boost feature also provided good subject exposure with pleasant and accurate colors. Stabilization was effective and compensated very well for camera motion.

With these improvements, we were also curious about the kind of score that Video Boost would generate, so we ran the data through our Camera v5 formula. The resulting videos would have earned the Pixel 9 Pro XL a simulated Video score of 164, a top score for this category, compared with the 152 Video score the device achieved without the feature activated in Camera v5.

Main

168

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

179

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL Video scores
Video Main 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.
Exposure
121

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

123

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Video target exposure was generally accurate down to low light, with a fairly wide dynamic range.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Accurate target exposure, fairly wide dynamic range

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Accurate target exposure, fairly wide dynamic range

Google Pixel 8 Pro – Accurate target exposure, fairly wide dynamic range

In some scenes, dynamic range could be limited, with slight exposure instabilities.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Slightly limited dynamic range, noticeable exposure adaptation at the end of the panning shot

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slightly limited dynamic range, smoother exposure adaptation

Google Pixel 8 Pro – Good exposure, slightly limited dynamic range. Slight white balance instabilities are sometimes visible in this video
Color
121

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

126

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 generally neutral, with pleasant colors and skin tones. In terms of video color, the Pixel 9 Pro XL was overall on par with its direct competitors and its predecessor Pixel 8 Pro.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Smooth white balance adaptation, nice skin tones. Pleasant color rendering

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Smooth white balance adaptation, nice skin tones

Google Pixel 8 Pro – Smooth white balance adaptation, nice skin tones.
Autofocus
124

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

Best

i

For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.

In our tests, the Pixel 9 PRo XL’s video autofocus worked very reliably. Focus was accurate and reacted swiftly to changes in the scenes. Our experts observed no focus failures in our testing and overall the Pixel was among the very best for this test category. It’s also worth mentioning that the new Google device slightly adapts the field of view when the focus changes to a different subject in the scene, making for smoother autofocus transitions.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Subject in focus during tracking, swift adaptation when target changes

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Subject in focus during tracking, swift adaptation when target changes

Google Pixel 8 Pro – Some autofocus stepping during tracking
Texture
113

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

116

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

Texture levels in video were generally high when recording in bright light outdoors or under typical indoor lighting. Results were on par with direct competitors in the Ultra Premium bracket of the market.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Good detail on the face and scenery

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Good detail on the face and scenery

Google Pixel 8 Pro – Good detail on face

In low light, the Pixel 9 Pro XL applied less heavy-handed noise reduction than the Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max, resulting in better levels of detail but higher noise levels.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Fairly good detail  on both models. Orange cast is visible in this video

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Fairly low level of detail. Orange cast is visible in this video

Google Pixel 8 Pro – Fairly low level of detail: Pink cast is visible in this video
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.
Noise
102

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

124

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Video noise was generally well under control but could be noticeable along high-contrast edges in some scenes.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Generally low noise but some noise along high-contrast edges

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Noise well under control

Google Pixel 8 Pro – Generally low noise but some noise along high-contrast edges

In low light, video noise became more intrusive, with noticeable luminance noise in the shadow portions of the frame. In such conditions, noise levels were higher than on the iPhone, but noise management was improved over the Pixel 8 Pro, with more finely grained noise.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Noise is visible in the shadows, on face and edges.  Slight orange cast is visible in this video

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Noise well under control. Slight orange cast is visible in this video

Google Pixel 8 Pro –  Noise in the shadows and on face is visible. Slight pink cast is visible in this video
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.
Stabilization
113

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

122

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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 test, the Pixel’s stabilization system was capable of counteracting camera shake effectively, both when standing still and walking while recording. Performance was on par with the direct competitors in the Ultra Premium segment. This said, the Google device displayed more sharpness differences between frames than the iPhone. This was particularly noticeable under indoor lighting and in low light.

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Effective stabilization but some sharpness differences between frames when walking, very noticeable camera shake when running

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Effective stabilization, no sharpness differences between frames, running motion fairly well stabilized

Google Pixel 8 Pro – Effective stabilization but some sharpness differences between frames when walking, very noticeable camera shake when running
Artifacts
85

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

87

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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

In our tests, we only observed very few video artifacts on the Pixel 9 Pro XL. The device received penalty points for shifting the frame rate towards 24fps in very low light instead of 30fps like most competitors. With the camera only capable of 30fps in 4K HDR mode, a judder effect was also noticeable when panning. Thanks to 60fps HDR video, this did not occur on the iPhone.

UltraWide

136

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

145

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 30 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

On the ultra-wide end, the Pixel 9 Pro XL excels at capturing expansive landscapes and group scenes with a pleasing wide-angle aesthetic, delivering good color consistency and minimal distortion. Video stabilization is particularly effective, compensating well for hand shake and enabling smooth, cinematic pans at 0.7× magnification or similar settings. In well-lit conditions, detail levels are acceptable, though some softness and vignetting can be observed toward the edges of the frame. In lower light, image noise becomes more noticeable, and edge clarity diminishes slightly. Autofocus performs smoothly; however, like many ultra-wide modules, it features fixed focus, making it best suited for static or slow-moving subjects. Overall, the Pixel 9 Pro XL offers a dependable ultra-wide video experience with excellent stabilization, making it ideal for casual use and creative shots. While it doesn’t match the fine detail delivered by the telephoto zoom, it remains a strong performer in its category.

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
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
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
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.

Tele

111

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

130

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 50 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

The Pixel 9 Pro XL’s telephoto lens delivers consistently strong video zoom performance, offering crisp detail, accurate colors, and smooth stabilization at medium to high zoom levels (up to 5× optical). The autofocus reliably locks on subjects with minimal hunting, producing clean, stable footage even while handheld. At longer zoom distances, there’s a slight drop in sharpness and increased grain in darker scenes, but overall the lens maintains a balanced mix of clarity and exposure. Google’s computational enhancements help smooth transitions between zoom levels, ensuring relatively consistent results. It’s a solid performer, though under very low light or extreme zoom, noise becomes more noticeable compared to flagship standouts.

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
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
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
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.

 

The post Google Pixel 9 Pro XL Camera test – Retested appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-9-pro-xl-camera-test-retested/feed/ 0 Duo_outdoor_Google_Pixel_9_Pro_XL Duo_indoor_Google_Pixel_9_Pro_XL GooglePixel9ProXL_Portrait GooglePixel9ProXL_Tele Amadeus_Google_Pixel_9_ProXL.j Flower_macro_Google_Pixel_9_ProXL Flower_Macro_Iphone_15_Pro_Max Flower_Macro_Huawei_Pura_70_ULTRA BacklitGroup_Google_Pixel9PROXL BacklitGroup_AppleiPhone15ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 BacklitGroup_GooglePixel8Pro_DxOMark_05-00 Google_Pixel_9_Pro_XL_good_bright_recovery Google_Pixel_9_Pro_XL_limited_bright_recovery FlashOffPortraitWellWest_GooglePixel9ProXL FlashOffPortraitWellWest_AppleiPhone15ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 FlashOffPortraitWellWest_GooglePixel8Pro_DxOMark_05-00 HelloMotion_Google_Pixel9ProXL HelloMotion_AppleiPhone15ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 HelloMotion_GooglePixel8Pro_DxOMark_05-00 Walker_Front_Google_Pixel_9_Pro_XL Walker_Front_Apple_iPhone_15_Pro_Max Walker_Front_Huawei_Pura_70_Ultra DOF_Google_Pixel_9_Pro_XL DOF_Apple_iPhone_15_PRO_ Extended_DOF_Huwei_Pura_70_ULtra Portrait_closeup_Google_Pixel_9_Pro IMG_1357 IMG_20240813_160517 PeopleRunningClose_GooglePixel9ProXL PeopleRunningClose_AppleiPhone15ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 PeopleRunningClose_GooglePixel8Pro_DxOMark_05-00 CandleDinner_GooglePixel9ProXL CandleDinner_AppleiPhone15ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 CandleDinner_GooglePixel8Pro_DxOMark_05-00 Indoor_Portrait_Google_Pixel_9_Pro_XL Indoor_Portrait_Apple_iPhone_15_Pro_Max IMG_20240813_171204 FamilySofa_GooglePixel9ProXL FamilySofa_AppleiPhone15ProMax2_DxOMark_05-00 FamilySofa_GooglePixel8Pro_DxOMark_05-00 Best Bokeh_Google_Pixel_9_pro_XL Bokeh_Apple_iPhone_15_Pro_Max Bokeh_Huawei_Pura_70_Ultra 18mm_PortraitSquare_Google_Pixel__9ProXL 18mm_PortraitSquare_GooglePixel8Pro_DxOMark_05-00 18mm_PortraitSquare_HuaweiPura70Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 Best Honor Magic7 Pro Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic7-pro-camera-test-retested/ https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic7-pro-camera-test-retested/#respond Wed, 25 Jun 2025 17:16:42 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=185300&preview=true&preview_id=185300 We put the Honor Magic7 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 [...]

The post Honor Magic7 Pro Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Honor Magic7 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 1/1.3″ sensor, 1.2µm pixels, 24mm equivalent f/1.4-2.0 variable aperture lens, Dual Pixel PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 50MP 1/2.88″ sensor, 0.61µm pixels, 12mm equivalent f/2.0-aperture lens
  • Tele: 200MP 1/1.4″ sensor, 0.56µm pixels, 72mm equivalent f/2.6-aperture lens, PDAF, OIS

Scoring

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


Honor Magic7 Pro
148
camera
147
Photo
Main
145

177

Bokeh
160

175

Ultra-Wide
151

158

Tele
150

166

150
Video
Main
156

179

Ultra-Wide
129

145

Tele
127

130

Use cases & Conditions

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

BEST 159

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 182

Outdoor

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

BEST 172

Indoor

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

BEST 146

Lowlight

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

BEST 151

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • High levels of detail when using the tele zoom
  • Good subject isolation in bokeh mode
  • Well-controlled noise levels, down to low light conditions

Cons

  • No documented HDR format used in photo on tested version of the device
  • Unnatural texture rendering in low light
  • Lack of dynamic range and unstable exposure in video mode

The Honor Magic7 Pro delivered a solid overall camera performance in the DXOMARK Camera tests, but some limitations meant it could not claim one of the top positions in our ranking. The device stood out in terms of zoom capabilities, thanks to high levels of texture, even at long range tele settings. However, some artifacts remained noticeable in tele shots. The lack of support for any public HDR formats in the version of the device, that we had available for testing, was a major drawback. It was responsible for a flatter and darker overall image rendering, when compared to competitors like the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra or Xiaomi 15 Ultra, when viewed with the playback conditions of our V6 protocol.

The Magic7 Pro’s primary camera module comes with a variable aperture, but in our tests the system failed to provide any real benefits in scenes where a wide depth of field is advantageous, for example group portraits. Our testers also found the Honor’s image processing to apply heavy sharpening and AI-generated detail reconstruction. This resulted in unnatural textures and an overall artificial look of the images. Video performance was another weak point, with noticeable instabilities, significant noise, and overall inconsistency, compared to leading rivals. Despite the relatively good zoom performance, the sum of the issues mentioned above prevented the Magic7 Pro from fully competing at the highest level in the Ultra Premium segment.

Honor Magic7 Pro
BEST 146
Lowlight

When shooting in low light, the Honor Magic7 Pro’s primary camera module handled exposure well and delivered natural color rendering, capturing a well-balanced scene without any clipped highlights. However, while the aggressive noise reduction was capable of reducing grain, this came at the cost of fine detail. In order to compensate for this, the image processing pipeline frequently produced unnatural texture artifacts, giving surfaces and skin textures an overly processed appearance.

BEST 159
Portrait

When capturing portraits, the Honor Magic7 Pro delivered mixed results. In good lighting, color rendering on faces was generally accurate, but contrast was low compared to devices that use a publicly documented HDR format. In addition, aggressive image processing often resulted in unnatural textures and an overprocessed look. On the plus side, subject isolation was decent, albeit with sometimes inconsistent edge detection. Using the telephoto lens offered more natural facial proportions and framing, but sharpness was often exaggerated. In lower light, noise reduction caused smearing and loss of detail. The autofocus could also be unreliable, making the overall portrait experience less consistent than on top-tier competitors.

BEST 151
Zoom

The Honor Magic7 Pro delivered on overall solid zoom performance, with good detail and consistent color rendering across most focal lengths. Medium-range zoom (around 3-5x) was particularly good, maintaining good sharpness and minimal noise when shooting in daylight. At longer zoom distances, the device continued to perform well, preserving fine textures better than many competitors in its class. However, some texture artifacts and oversharpening started creeping in at longer tele zoom settings, especially in areas with complex patterns or low contrast. Transitions between lenses were generally smooth, but minor shifts in color tone or exposure could occur. In low light, zoom performance degraded noticeably, with increased noise and reduced detail. This said, the image results remained usable. Overall, the Honor Magic7 Pro’s zoom performance stood out in its class, thanks to reliable results and good levels of detail across a wide range of zoom settings.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where 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 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.

Honor Magic 7 Pro Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo 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

147

Honor Magic7 Pro

170

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as 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, landscape and zoom 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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

145

Honor Magic7 Pro

177

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
Honor Magic 7 Pro Photo scores
The photo Main 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 at 1x.

In default photo mode, the Honor Magic7 Pro delivered vibrant, well-balanced colors with reliable white balance and a nice dynamic range. The level of captured detail was good, with fine textures rendered clearly. However, on occasions AI processing could create some softness on skin textures or moving subjects. Noise levels were minimal in daylight shooting and well-managed in low light. Only some slight luminance noise could make an appearance in high-contrast scenes. Autofocus was fast and accurate, usually locking onto the target, even in complex scenes or dim conditions. Overall, the Honor produced sharp, clean, and vibrant images in photo mode, but compared to competing devices with public HDR format, rendering could be slightly flat and lacked brightness.

Close-Up

The Magic7 Pro’s macro performance was decent but did not stand out in the flagship segment. The camera uses the ultra-wide lens for close focusing, allowing shots from a shooting distance of about 2.5–4 cm. In good light, macro images showed fair detail and accurate colors but were not as sharp or textured as the images from dedicated macro camera modules. Edge softness could be noticeable and occasional focus hunting could occur, especially in uneven lighting. In our testing, AI occasionally also overprocessed close-up textures, leading to an unnatural smoothing effect. Overall, macro mode was usable for casual close-ups, such as flowers or textures, but not among the best in class.

Exposure
86

Honor Magic7 Pro

131

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

The Honor Magic7 Pro’s auto exposure was solid in most shooting conditions but fell short of flagship competitors in terms of HDR rendering. While exposure was generally balanced, the device does not support any publicly documented HDR photo format. In our tests, this limited its ability to deliver bright highlights and deep shadows on compatible displays. As a result, images and videos could appear flatter, with lower peak brightness and reduced contrast, compared to flagship devices from Apple, Xiaomi or Oppo. This had an impact on both the “punch” of the image and the highlight/shadow separation in high-contrast scenes. Our testers also noticed a few failures in challenging dim conditions, where faces were rendered too dark.

Honor Magic7 Pro – Face exposure too dark
Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Better face exposure
Color
120

Honor Magic7 Pro

130

Xiaomi 15 Ultra
i

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 according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

The Honor Magic7 Pro delivered vivid and generally well-balanced colors in default photo mode, with accurate white balance and nice saturation in most scenes. However, occasional inconsistencies, such as yellow or magenta shifts under artificial or mixed lighting, could be noticeable. While color tuning was appealing and suitable for social media, it lacked the precise, scene-adaptive color calibration seen in top-tier flagships, like Apple’s latest iPhone models.

Autofocus
106

Honor Magic7 Pro

126

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

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.

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.
Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as 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 in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. 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.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Diana setup: 10000Lux Δ0EV D55 Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 10000 Lux with D55 illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Eugene setup: 5Lux Δ0EV 2700K Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 5 Lux with LED 2700K illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

The Honor Magic7 Pro’s autofocus system was fast and reliable. It combines dual pixel phase detection (PDAF) with a laser autofocus system. In our tests, this resulted in quick and accurate focus acquisition, in both well-lit and moderately low light scenes. Subject tracking was effective and focus remained stable in most everyday scenes. However, in more challenging situations, for example scenes with fast-moving subjects or in very low light, occasional focus hunting or minor focus errors could occur. While solid overall, the Magic7 Pro AF system did not quite match the consistency of top-tier competitors, such as the Google Pixel or Galaxy Ultra series, especially in motion-heavy or low-contrast scenes.

Although the Honor Magic7 Pro features a variable aperture (ranging from f/1.4 to f/4.0), in our tests, its impact in group shots was limited. In scenes with subjects at varying shooting distances, the camera could still select a wider aperture, such as f/1.4, resulting in a shallow depth of field and softness on faces outside the focal plane. This undermined the potential benefit of the hardware, as the feature currently does not deliver consistent improvements in  terms of multi-subject shots or layered compositions.

Honor Magic7 Pro - Group shot
Honor Magic7 Pro - Out-of-focus background face, heavy processing and sharpening to compensate for softness
Texture
106

Honor Magic7 Pro

131

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for 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.

The Honor Magic7 Pro captured fine textures well, preserving details like fabric, foliage and hair nicely. The high resolution sensor in the primary camera module helped maintain sharpness without excessive noise reduction in good light. However, aggressive AI processing sometimes resulted in over-smoothing, especially in scenes with motion or portraits, where skin texture could be softened and reduced. In low light, texture retention dropped slightly as noise reduction became more aggressive, causing some loss of detail. Overall, texture performance was strong for everyday shots, but images could look slightly artificial when the AI enhancement features kicked in heavily.

Honor Magic7 Pro - Texture
Honor Magic7 Pro - Unnatural texture rendering on fine facial features
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Texture
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Natural face detail
Noise
126

Honor Magic7 Pro

129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10000 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
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.

In good light the Honor Magic7 Pro delivered low noise levels, producing clean and crisp images with minimal grain. In low light noise was also well under control, but at default settings some luminance noise and slight grain were still noticeable, especially in the shadow portions of the frame. Overall, the noise performance was solid, though, balancing detail retention and noise reduction effectively for everyday shooting.

Artifacts
77

Honor Magic7 Pro

80

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, 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

Bokeh

160

Honor Magic7 Pro

175

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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.

The phone’s bokeh mode produced pleasing background blur with smooth, natural-looking separation between subject and background. Edge detection was generally accurate, handling hair and complex outlines well, but our testers noticed some occasional minor errors around fine details. The blur strength was pleasant, applying a full frame DSLR look to the images. However, AI-processing often applied additional skin softening, which made textures look less natural and subjects slightly flat.

Honor Magic7 Pro - Bokeh mode
Honor Magic7 Pro - Fairly good subject isolation
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Bokeh mode
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Fairly good subject isolation, noise in textured areas
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Bokeh mode
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Good subject isolation, fine details and sharp edges

Tele

150

Honor Magic7 Pro

166

Xiaomi 15 Ultra
i

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.

Honor Magic 7 Pro Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

The Honor Magic7 Pro telephoto performance was solid but lagged behind the leading devices for this category, such as the Oppo Find X8 Ultra and Xiaomi 15 Ultra. The 3.5x optical zoom lens delivered sharp and detailed images with good color accuracy and well-controlled noise when shooting in daylight. In low light, the drop in image quality was more noticeable than on the primary camera, with noisier and less vibrant shots. The autofocus remained reliable but could be slightly slower than on the primary camera. Overall, the Honor’s telephoto setup was reliable and did well for everyday zoom shots but could not deliver the same crispness and image quality in low light as the best-in-class rivals.

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
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
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
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.

UltraWide

151

Honor Magic7 Pro

158

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

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.

Honor Magic 7 Pro Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

The ultra-wide camera module delivered a good performance in bright conditions, capturing wide scenes with decent detail and natural colors. However, compared to the primary sensor, sharpness was noticeably reduced and images showed higher levels of distortion. In low light, the ultra-wide struggled with increased noise, reduced detail, and washed-out colors. While useful for landscape and group shots, the ultra-wide’s image quality lagged clearly behind the primary and telephoto cameras, especially in challenging lighting.

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
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
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
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.

Video

150

Honor Magic7 Pro

166

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 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 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

156

Honor Magic7 Pro

179

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
Honor Magic 7 Pro Video scores
Video Main 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.

In our tests, the Honor Magic7 Pro delivered a competent but unexceptional video performance. At 4K resolution and 30 frames per second, and with good lighting, the camera captured detailed and stable footage with accurate colors. Stabilization worked well at 4K, helping reduce camera shake during handheld recording. In low light, video quality dropped noticeably, with noise, softer textures, and occasional autofocus instabilities.

Exposure
92

Honor Magic7 Pro

123

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

Video exposure on the Honor Magic7 Pro was generally stable and consistent in well-lit conditions, with smooth transitions when changing from brighter to darker scene content and vice versa. In low light, exposure tended to be conservative, resulting in underexposed footage with muted details and noise. While usable for casual recording, overall video exposure was less refined and dynamic than on best-in-class devices, such as the Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max, that is still the leader in this test category.

Honor Magic7 Pro – Low face exposure

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Nice face exposure
Color
112

Honor Magic7 Pro

126

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 colors on the Honor Magic7 Pro were nice and generally accurate in good light, with vibrant tones and good white balance. Skin tones looked natural and saturation was good without appearing overly boosted. In low light, color fidelity dropped noticeably and video footage could be desaturated. In addition, subtle tones were lost due to noise and compression.

Autofocus
120

Honor Magic7 Pro

124

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
i

For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.

Video autofocus on the Honor Magic7 Pro was fast and mostly reliable, especially when recording in good light. Subjects were tracked smoothly and focus transitions did not show any stepping. However, in low light or high-contrast scenes, the autofocus could be less consistent, with occasional focus breathing or slow refocusing when subjects moved quickly or entered the frame.

Honor Magic7 Pro – Focus adaptation issues
Texture
108

Honor Magic7 Pro

116

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

Video texture rendering was pleasant in bright light, with sharp details and well-defined textures. Thanks to light-handed noise reduction, fine elements in the scene retained a natural texture. However, in low light, texture quality dropped noticeably, with aggressive noise reduction smoothing out fine patterns,  resulting in a reduction of detail.

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.
Noise
110

Honor Magic7 Pro

124

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Video noise on the Honor Magic7 Pro was well-controlled in bright conditions. In daylight, footage was clean, without sacrificing too much detail. However, in low light, or when recording under indoor lighting, noise became more intrusive, especially in the shadow portions of the frame and areas of plain color. In dimmer conditions, more heavy-handed noise reduction also resulted in a loss of fine detail and textures, particularly on faces and in the background.

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.
Stabilization
114

Honor Magic7 Pro

122

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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.

Video stabilization on the Honor Magic7 Pro was effective in standard shooting conditions in 4K mode. The primary camera delivered smooth rendering during handheld recording when walking, or with light movement. Panning was also handled well, with only minimal jitter or frame shifts. However, in low light, stabilization performance dropped. Occasional rolling shutter effects were noticeable, especially during quick camera movements.

Honor Magic7 Pro – Effective stabilization, slight residual motion from walking

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Effective stabilization
Artifacts
83

Honor Magic7 Pro

87

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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

Tele

127

Honor Magic7 Pro

130

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 50 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

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
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
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
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.

In our tests, the Honor’s telephoto camera offered usable but limited video quality. At a 3.5x zoom, detail and color were decent in bright light. However, in low light video quality degraded quickly, with soft textures, increased noise, and weaker stabilization, making video look shaky and less refined. Autofocus was slower and less reliable with the tele camera, especially when tracking moving subjects or transitioning between focal planes. Overall, the telephoto camera was suitable for static daylight video scenes, but struggled in more dynamic or low light situations.

UltraWide

129

Honor Magic7 Pro

145

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 30 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

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
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
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
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.

The ultra-wide camera provides a wide field of view, which was useful for landscapes or when shooting video in tight spaces. However, in our tests it suffered from reduced sharpness, especially at the edges. In good lighting, color and exposure were acceptable. In darker conditions, the ultra-wide camera introduced strong noise, visible grain, and a loss of texture, as well as occasional focus inconsistencies. Stabilization was decent due to the wide angle, but the overall image quality was not on par with premium competitors.

Honor Magic 7 Pro – Low exposure at the beginning, visisble noise noise on subejct at the end

The post Honor Magic7 Pro Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic7-pro-camera-test-retested/feed/ 0 5207_102_HonorMagic7Pro 5301_105_HonorMagic7Pro 5301_105_Xiaomi15Ultra Huawei Pura 70 Ultra Camera test – Retested https://www.dxomark.com/huawei-pura-70-ultra-camera-test-retested/ https://www.dxomark.com/huawei-pura-70-ultra-camera-test-retested/#respond Wed, 25 Jun 2025 17:16:08 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=185372&preview=true&preview_id=185372 We put the Huawei Pura 70 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 [...]

The post Huawei Pura 70 Ultra Camera test – Retested appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Huawei Pura 70 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: 50MP 1″ sensor, f/1.6-4.0-aperture lens, DualPD AF, Sensor-shift OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 40MP, f/2.2-aperture lens, QuadPD AF
  • Tele: 50MP, f/2.1-aperture lens, QuadPD AF, OIS

Scoring

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

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
163
camera
167
Photo
Main
177

Best

Bokeh
165

175

Ultra-Wide
158

Best

Tele
138

166

155
Video
Main
163

179

Ultra-Wide
136

145

Tele
125

130

Use cases & Conditions

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

BEST 159

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 182

Outdoor

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

BEST 172

Indoor

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

BEST 146

Lowlight

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

BEST 151

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Nicely balanced exposure and contrast across all light conditions; outstanding rendering when viewed on HDR display
  • Very nice colors when viewed on HDR display
  • Variable aperture allows for optimized depth of field in each scene
  • Very good texture/noise trade-off across most conditions and in all zoom settings
  • Natural blur in bokeh mode, smooth gradient, and accurate  subject isolation
  • 3.5x tele macro shots at f/2.1 offer nice perspective and good sharpness

Cons

  • Local noise in video
  • Ghosting in shots with moving subjects, even in bright light
  • Occasional color quantization, especially in low light
  • Occasional unnatural textures in low light and night shots
  • Some unnatural rendering in tele zoom shots

 

Please note that while the text content below has been updated, the illustrations remain those from the original test. Images will be updated soon by the DXOMARK teams.

The Huawei Pura 70 Ultra delivered outstanding performances across all areas in the DXOMARK Camera tests, and now holds the second position in our smartphone camera rankings, based on the most recent evaluation of the device. Still image results were exceptional across all camera modules, resulting in top scores not only for photo but also for zoom—both wide and tele. The camera’s ability to balance detail retention and noise reduction was impressive, and images showed precise exposure and a wide dynamic range, as well as pleasant colors. Thanks to its large main camera sensor and careful tuning, the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra showed strong improvements in texture and noise compared to its predecessors. Good detail and exposure were maintained, even when shooting in low light. The device showed a particular ability to deliver images with natural skin-tone rendering and an accurate white balance even in very complex lighting conditions such as low light. The variable aperture helped provide optimal depth-of-field and good sharpness on all subjects in group shots. The autofocus was fast and reliable in static and dynamic scenes alike in most environment. The fast shutter time and response allowed for freezing motion and capturing the decisive moment.

It’s worth noting that since the initial testing (run on the previous version of the camera protocol) , the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra has received a major firmware update introducing support for ISO gain map format. This enhancement ensure accurate HDR content display across a wide range of devices and applications, including Google Chrome and HDR-capable displays, making the phone’s imaging results more widely viewable than before. This update significantly improved contrast and color rendering. However, a few regressions were observed compared to the initially tested version of the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra, such as slightly increased noise in video, some focusing issues measured on our new AF-HDR Portrait setup and a reduced texture quality at long zoom ranges. Despite these drawbacks, the overall performance of the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra still remains extremely competitive, including at the time of writing.

Video was tested on the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra in 4K/30fps mode using the HDR Vivid format. Although the Pura 70 Ultra progressed in certain aspects of video performance over the Mate 60 Pro+, the Pura 70 Ultra could not quite match the current best video devices, the Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max and the Oppo Find X8 Ultra, when it came to the most challenging low-light test scenes.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Wide dynamic range, good exposure, vibrant colors, high level of detail.

BEST 146
Lowlight

The Huawei Pura 70 Ultra delivers strong low-light camera performance across all modules, maintaining good detail, accurate exposure, and low noise levels even in challenging conditions. Thanks to its large main sensor, effective HDR processing, and advanced noise reduction, the device captures scenes with a wide dynamic range, preserving highlights and shadow details better than most competitors. Skin tones remain natural and white balance is generally accurate, even under mixed artificial lighting. Autofocus is responsive and reliable in dim conditions, and motion is well frozen thanks to short shutter times. While some noise can still appear in very dark areas, the overall low-light imaging experience is impressive and consistent, ranking among the best in its class.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Wide dynamic range, nice colors, high levels of detail, very slight noise, accurate focus and wide depth of field.
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Accurate exposure but slightly visible clipping and color quantization, very slight noise, slightly inaccurate focus and shallow depth of field.
Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Accurate exposure, slightly visible color quantization, very slight noise, slightly inaccurate focus and shallow depth of field.
BEST 159
Portrait

The Huawei Pura 70 Ultra offers excellent portrait photography performance across default, bokeh, and telephoto modes. In default mode, it captures subjects with natural skin tones, sharp facial details, and a pleasing balance of texture and noise, even in indoor or low-light settings. The bokeh mode produces a realistic depth-of-field effect, with well-shaped blur gradients and effective subject separation, although occasional edge artifacts can still appear in complex scenes. Thanks to the variable aperture on the main camera, depth-of-field is handled intelligently, enhancing group and single-subject portraits. At 3.5× telephoto, portraits benefit from natural perspective compression, good subject isolation, and consistent color and exposure, though fine details may appear slightly softer than at 1×. Overall, the Pura 70 Ultra delivers high-quality portrait results with aesthetic rendering and strong versatility across focal lengths.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Wide depth of field in group shots, good detail, nice skin tones, well-balanced exposure and contrast.
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Depth of field is slightly too shallow in group shots, nice skin tones, well-balanced exposure.
Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Wide depth of field in group shots, good detail, nice skin tones, well-balanced exposure.
BEST 151
Zoom

The Huawei Pura 70 Ultra’s telephoto performance is among the best, delivering high-quality images across a wide zoom range. Its 3.5× periscope telephoto lens captures excellent detail, with natural texture rendering, well-controlled noise, and consistent exposure with the main camera, especially in bright conditions. At medium- to high-zoom levels, the device maintains good fairly sharpness and contrast, making it well-suited for portraits and distant subjects. At longer range, the level of details tend to drop and the device is not in par with the performances of top devices among its category like Xiaomi 15 Ultra and Oppo FindX8 Ultra

 

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where 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 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.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo 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

167

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

170

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as 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, landscape and zoom 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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

177

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

Best

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra Photo scores
The photo Main 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 at 1x.

In photo mode, the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra delivered very strong performances only topped by Oppo Find X8 Ultra at Camera v6 launch. The combination of the large 1” image sensor and the f/1.6 – 4.0 variable aperture allowed for depth of field adjustments and creative flexibility that is pretty much unheard of in the smartphone world. In our tests, photos offered nice colors and good contrast when viewed on an HDR display. Dynamic range was wide, and good face exposure made for pleasant portrait shots. White balance was accurate, and the atmosphere of the ambient light was captured nicely. The autofocus was fast and accurate, and the camera managed a good trade-off between noise reduction and texture preservation.

Minor issues included some slight exposure and white balance instabilities, as well as an occasional ghosting effect, especially when shooting high-contrast scenes. Our testers also noticed slight noise in very low-light shots. The device also showed some regression when heavily challenged on its autofocus performances with this new version tested.

In addition, the Huawei did well when taking close-up and macro shots, thanks to the fairly wide aperture and close focus distance of the tele camera, which was used in macro mode. White balance could sometimes be slightly unstable in macro images, but other than that the pictures were detailed and pleasant, with a nice perspective compression.

Close-Up

In our tests, the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra captured very nice macro shots. The use of the 3.5x tele lens allowed for a longer shooting distance than most rivals and provided a nicely compressed perspective. Overall, macro and close-up shots were pleasant and showed good detail. Only occasionally did our testers notice a slightly unstable white balance.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Excellent subject isolation, thanks to the macro tele module, accurate focus.
Oppo Find X7 Ultra – Less pronounced subject isolation.
Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Good subject isolation, slightly inaccurate focus.
Exposure
131

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

Best

i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

The camera managed pleasant brightness with a very wide dynamic range across all light conditions. In combination with the very good HDR format rendering, this resulted in some of the best balanced images we have seen on a smartphone. Contrast was very pleasant as well, even when shooting difficult scenes.

This said, our testers noticed some slight exposure instabilities in challenging conditions, for example, some backlit scenes. In such conditions, results could be inconsistent across a series of consecutive shots.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Accurate target exposure, outstanding contrast on HDR display.
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Accurate target exposure, very good contrast on HDR display.
Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Accurate target exposure, good contrast on HDR display.
Color
127

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

130

Xiaomi 15 Ultra
i

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 according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Color was rendered nicely, with generally accurate white balance and only occasional color casts, resulting in the device reaching the top score in color. Skin-tone rendering was good across all types of skin tones and light conditions. The HDR format also helped improve color rendering, with nice color contrast in all scenes, but especially backlit portrait shots. On the downside, our testers observed some slight white balance instabilities in all light conditions.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Accurate white balance and color rendering, pleasant skin tone.
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slightly cold color cast, accurate color rendering, pleasant skin tone.
Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Accurate white balance and color rendering, pleasant skin tone.
Autofocus
126

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

Best

i

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.

Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Diana setup: 10000Lux Δ0EV D55 Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 10000 Lux with D55 illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Eugene setup: 5Lux Δ0EV 2700K Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 5 Lux with LED 2700K illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

In our tests, the Pura 70 Ultra autofocus was fast and accurate, allowing for sharp images and capture at the decisive moment. However, we did observe very occasional focus failures in very dim conditions on portrait scenes. The variable aperture system in combination with the large image sensor meant that the Huawei was capable of optimizing depth of field for each scene. For example, in group portraits, the Huawei produced a wider depth of field than competing devices, providing good sharpness across all subject distances. The camera was capable of picking the best aperture for all our portrait test scenes, from single subjects to larger groups.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Wide depth of field allows sharp background subject.
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Shallow depth of field makes background subject blurry.
Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Wide depth of field allows sharp background subject.

Texture
123

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

131

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

i

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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for 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.

In our tests, the Pura 70 Ultra captured high levels of detail and images with natural texture rendering. The excellent real-life results were confirmed by objective measurements in the lab. Texture was very fine and accurate, providing natural detail rendering on a wide range of scenes, from skin texture in portraits to distant vegetation in landscape shots. In addition, the level of captured detail remained high in low and very low light conditions. This said, our testers observed a local loss of detail in some scenes, especially in low light.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Excellent level of details
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Good level of details
Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Good level of details

Noise
124

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

i

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 0.1 to 10000 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
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.

In our tests, the Pura 70 Ultra kept image noise very well under control across all test conditions. Luminance noise was managed well, but chroma noise and color quantization could sometimes be noticeable, especially when shooting in low light.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Very well-controlled noise even in very low light.
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Slight noise in very low light.
Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Very well controlled noise in very low light.

Artifacts
80

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

Best

i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, 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

Bokeh

165

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

175

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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.

When shooting in bokeh mode, the Pura 70 Ultra captured images with a generally natural blur effect, smooth blur gradient and accurate subject isolation.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Natural blur effect, smooth blur gradient, very accurate subject isolation.
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Natural blur effect, smooth blur gradient, accurate subject isolation.
Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Natural blur effect, smooth blur gradient, accurate subject isolation.

Tele

138

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

166

Xiaomi 15 Ultra
i

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.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

In the telephoto category, the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra delivers excellent performance at medium zoom ranges, with good detail, natural texture rendering, and consistent color and exposure. However, at very long zoom distances, it does not perform as well as the latest flagship devices from Xiaomi and Oppo, such as the Xiaomi 15 Ultra and Oppo Find X8 Ultra. In those extreme ranges, Huawei’s images tend to show softer details and reduced contrast, along with slightly more visible noise, especially in low-light scenes. While still highly capable overall, the Pura 70 Ultra’s telephoto module falls just short of the class-leading long-range zoom quality offered by its top competitors.

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
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
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
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.
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - 3.5x - Accurate exposure, pleasant skin tone, excellent level of detail.
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - 3.5x - Accurate exposure, pleasant skin tone, slight loss of detail.
Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - 3.5x - Accurate exposure, pleasant skin tone, very good level of detail.

UltraWide

158

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

Best

i

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.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

The performance in ultra-wide was almost the best we have tested so far at DXOMARK, with an excellent level of detail and very well-managed noise levels in the whole field of the 13mm ultra-wide module. Dynamic range was wide, and exposure and white balance were accurate. The color rendering was pleasant in most conditions.

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
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
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
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.
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Wide dynamic range, pleasant colors, excellent level of details.
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Wide dynamic range, slight white balance cast, excellent level of details.
Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Wide dynamic range, very slight white balance cast, excellent level of details.

Video

155

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

166

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 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 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

163

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

179

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

In our video tests, the Pura 70 Ultra’s autofocus performance was excellent, with quick reactions and smooth transitions. Exposure and colors were accurate in most conditions, but our experts noticed some slight instabilities in low light. Color rendering in bright light was improved over the Mate 60 Pro+, with higher levels of saturation. However, colors still could not quite match the vibrance of the Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max.

Levels of captured detail were fairly high, and noise was well under control in bright light and when shooting indoors. However, some noise could be noticeable in low light, especially on moving elements in the scene. It is even more true with the latest version tested that showed some significant regression regarding noise management. Video stabilization was effective, with very few sharpness differences between video frames across all light conditions. Camera shake was only slightly noticeable in the recorded footage.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra Video scores
Video Main 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.
Exposure
121

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

123

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

In video mode, target exposure was generally accurate and dynamic range was fairly wide, providing good highlight preservation in high-contrast scenes across all light levels.

Color
122

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

126

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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.

White balance was accurate in most test conditions, but some slight adaptation issues could sometimes be noticeable in very challenging scenes.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Accurate skin tones, slightly visible color adaptations.

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Accurate skin tones, slightly visible color adaptations.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Accurate skin tones, slightly visible color adaptations.
Autofocus
116

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

124

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
i

For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.

The autofocus performed particularly well in video mode, with smooth and accurate focusing, even in difficult scenes.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Fast and smooth autofocus.

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Fast and smooth autofocus.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Fast and smooth autofocus.
Texture
109

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

116

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

Video texture measurements in the lab were high across all test conditions. This was confirmed by our results in real-life recording, with good texture across all types of subjects, including faces. However, our testers noticed some moving texture artifacts, especially when shooting video in low light.

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.
Noise
104

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

124

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Video noise was generally well under control in static scenes, including our lab tests. Some noise is visible in low light, especially on moving elements in the scene. And the quality of the video in dim conditions are significantly impacted by this regression that was overserved on latest version tested.

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.
Stabilization
115

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

122

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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.

Video stabilization did a very good job at compensating for camera motion, but it could not quite match the best-in-class devices. Artifacts, such as the jello effect or sharpness differences between frames were well under control.

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Excellent stabilization

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Excellent stabilization

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Excellent stabilization
Artifacts
77

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

87

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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

UltraWide

136

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

145

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 30 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

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
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
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
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.

Tele

125

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

130

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 50 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

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
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
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
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.

The Huawei Pura 70 Ultra provided a very good level of detail in video zoom, even though occasionally, some camera jumps as well as exposure and color variations were visible while zooming. The Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max still offers a smoother user experience for video zoom.

Overall the smartphone delivers strong video zoom performance, particularly excelling at medium telephoto ranges thanks to its 3.5× periscope telephoto lens. The camera produces sharp, detailed footage with consistent color accuracy and exposure, ensuring natural-looking distant subjects. Autofocus is fast and dependable even in dim lighting, and effective stabilization keeps handheld shots smooth across zoom levels. However, at longer zoom distances, you may notice slight softness and increased noise, especially under challenging lighting conditions, an area where flagship rivals like Oppo and Xiaomi tend to perform better. Overall, the Pura 70 Ultra offers versatile and high-quality video zoom, with real-world performance that’s impressive, though not quite on par with the very top long-range video zoom phones.

The post Huawei Pura 70 Ultra Camera test – Retested appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/huawei-pura-70-ultra-camera-test-retested/feed/ 0 Huawei Pura 70 Ultra Best Best Amadeus_HuaweiPura70Ultra IMG_20240502_231107_HuaweiPura70Ultra IMG_8737_AppleiPhone15ProMax IMG_20240502_231457_HuaweiMate60ProPlus_DxOMark PeopleTrioMultiPlan_HuaweiPura70Ultra PeopleTrioMultiPlan_AppleiPhone15ProMax PeopleTrioMultiPlan_HuaweiMate60ProPlus_DxOMark_05-00 Best IMG_20240502_151415_HuaweiPura70Ultra IMG20240502151541_OppoFindX7Ultra IMG_20240502_151614_HuaweiMate60ProPlus_DxOMark Best IMG_20240503_163455_Pura70Ultra IMG_8902_AppleiPhone15ProMax IMG_20240503_163803_HuaweiMate60ProPlus_DxOMark IMG_20240503_170117_HuaweiPura70Ultra IMG_8916_AppleiPhone15ProMax IMG_20240503_170428_HuaweiMate60ProPlus_DxOMark Best Best IMG_20240503_170912_HuaweiPura70Ultra IMG_E8922_AppleiPhone15ProMax IMG_20240503_171156_HuaweiMate60ProPlus_DxOMark Best 12mm_Cityscape_HuaweiPura70Ultra 12mm_Cityscape_AppleiPhone15ProMax 12mm_Cityscape_HuaweiMate60ProPlus_DxOMark OPPO Find X8 Ultra Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/oppo-find-x8-ultra-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/oppo-find-x8-ultra-camera-test/#respond Wed, 25 Jun 2025 17:15:37 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=185069&preview=true&preview_id=185069 We put the OPPO Find X8 Ultra through our rigorous DXOMARK and Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective, with our just released updated test protocol. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and [...]

The post OPPO Find X8 Ultra Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the OPPO Find X8 Ultra through our rigorous DXOMARK and Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective, with our just released updated test protocol. 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: 50 MP, f/1.8, 23mm (wide), PDAF, Ball-Type OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 50 MP, f/2, 15mm (ultrawide), PDAF.
  • Short Tele: 50 MP, f/2.1, 70mm (telephoto), PDAF, Ball-Type OIS
  • Long Tele: 50 MP, f/3.1, 135mm (telephoto), PDAF, Ball-Type OIS

Scoring

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


Oppo Find X8 Ultra
169
camera
170
Photo
Main
175

177

Bokeh
175

Best

Ultra-Wide
139

158

Tele
161

166

166
Video
Main
176

179

Ultra-Wide
139

145

Tele
130

Best

Use cases & Conditions

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

Top score Best

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

Top score Best

Outdoor

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

Top score Best

Indoor

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

Top score Best

Lowlight

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

Top score Best

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Outstanding Photo Portrait mode performance, delivering a precise subject separation and a realistic Bokeh effect
  • Accurate exposure and effective HDR implementation in both photo and video, enhancing contrast accross diverse lighting conditions
  • Consistently natural and vibrant color rendering in both landscape and portrait scenarios, even under challenging conditions
  • High level of detail retention in both photo and video, with effective noise reduction, including in low-light or complex scenes
  • Reliable and precise autofocus performance, with strong motion-freezing capabilities for capturing decisive moments
  • Outstanding Zoom performance in both Photo and Video, maintaining high detail fidelity at medium and long-range

Cons

  • Occasional color instabilities may be observed in both photo and video
  • Image artifacts, such as ghosting and fusion inconsistencies can appear in highly challenging scenarios, particularly involving motion

Please note that all image quality evaluations in this test, for photos and videos, were conducted using the HDR format. To accurately view HDR content, an HDR-capable display and compatible software are required if not viewed directly on the tested smartphone. Since the rendering can differ significantly between HDR and SDR formats, particularly in terms of color reproduction, the images presented in this article may not fully reflect the actual image quality achieved in HDR when viewed on non-HDR displays.

The OPPO Find X8 Ultra positions itself as a very compelling choice for photography enthusiasts and mobile videographers, establishing a new benchmark in several critical areas of mobile imaging performance. Building on the already strong foundation of the OPPO Find X8 Pro, the Find X8 Ultra introduces upgraded sensors, improved optics and is powered by the latest Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite chipset, delivering enhanced computational photography and overall imaging capabilities.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

A standout feature of the OPPO Find X8 Ultra is the exceptional performance of its Photo Portrait mode. The Bokeh rendering is both highly accurate and natural, delivering a refined subject-background separation that avoids artificial overprocessing. Whether capturing spontaneous moments or carefully composed portraits, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra consistently produces results with precision, depth, and visual sophistication.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra – Very good depth estimation, good preservation of details
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Some depth estimation inaccuracies on the hair. Some details are lost, slight noise is visible.
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Details are lost and unnatural, noise is visible.

One of the OPPO Find X8 Ultra’s key strengths is its robust exposure control and dynamic range management. Leveraging a well-optimized HDR implementation, the device delivers consistently excellent results in both photo and video capture across a wide range of lighting conditions. High-contrast scenarios, such as backlit portraits, high-dynamic-range landscapes, or low-light night scenes are rendered with precision, preserving highlight and shadow detail while maintaining vivid, natural-looking colors. This ensures a reliable performance in any lighting environment.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

The Find X8 Ultra also stands out for its consistent sharpness and fine detail retention. Even in low-light or high dynamic range scenes, the camera effectively mitigates noise without sacrificing image quality. This is particularly evident in portrait photography, where the device delivers detailed, naturally rendered results, avoiding the over-processed or unnatural textures sometimes seen in competing devices.

The autofocus system is both fast and accurate, enabling users to reliably capture important moments. Motion is effectively frozen in-frame, making the device well-suited for action-oriented scenarios such as sports, wildlife, or street photography. However, one limitation compared to devices featuring variable aperture systems like the latest Huawei flagships is a relatively shallow depth of field on the main camera. This can result in challenges maintaining full focus across subjects in group shots.

Adding to its versatility is the device’s excellent zoom performance, spanning from ultra-wide to long-range telephoto. The quad-camera system, including two telephoto lenses, provides outstanding detail reproduction at both medium and long focal lengths. This makes the Find X8 Ultra highly capable for a broad range of use cases, from wide-angle architectural photography to distant portrait or subject isolation.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra - Close range zoom scene
OPPO Find X8 Ultra - Good level of detail, noise is well managed
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Close range zoom scene
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Details are lost, noise is visible
OPPO Find X8 Ultra - Medium range zoom scene
OPPO Find X8 Ultra - Excellent level of detail
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Medium range zoom scene
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Details are lost
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Medium range zoom scene
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Good level of detail

In conclusion, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra firmly establishes itself as a top-tier imaging device, delivering class-leading performance across the majority of our test conditions. It excels particularly in Portrait photography, color accuracy, and flexible zoom capabilities. While minor limitations exist, they are largely restricted to edge-case scenarios and do not detract from the overall experience. For mobile photographers, content creators, and demanding users alike, the Find X8 Ultra offers a highly refined, reliable, and enjoyable imaging experience.

Top score Best
Lowlight

The OPPO Find X8 Ultra currently stands as the best overall performer in our database for low-light imaging. Its large 1-inch main sensor enables it to capture sharp, natural-looking images even in extremely dark environments. The device particularly excelled in our updated test protocol, which places greater emphasis on challenging use cases, especially low-light photography.

In photo, the Find X8 Ultra consistently outperformed its competitors in low-light conditions, maintaining strong detail retention, natural textures, and pleasing color rendering, even when lighting was severely limited.

In low-light video, the device also performs exceptionally well, closely rivaling the Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max, which currently leads in this category. Footage remains sharp and well-exposed, with good noise control and accurate color reproduction.

The zoom performance in low-light is equally impressive. The OPPO Find X8 Ultra delivers results nearly on par with the current top performer in this category, the Xiaomi 15 Ultra, preserving a high level of detail, accurate exposure, and good color fidelity across focal lengths.

Top score Best
Portrait

In our Portrait use-case ranking, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra took the top spot, thanks to its excellent handling of facial exposure, skin tone rendering, and background separation, even if the relatively shallow depth of field can occasionally affect sharpness in group shots.

The device reliably maintains good exposure and contrast on faces across a variety of difficult lighting conditions, with only minor inconsistencies in the most extreme cases. Its color rendering is particularly commendable: skin tones appear natural under a wide range of lighting scenarios, including strongly colored or mixed lighting. Although subtle color casts can occasionally appear, the Find X8 Ultra renders them in an authentic and natural way, whereas some competitors’ attempts at correction often result in unnatural, artificial-looking outcomes.

Where the device truly shines is in its Photo Portrait mode, which delivers an exceptionally realistic and accurate Bokeh effect. Subject-background separation is precise, with beautifully blurred backgrounds that replicate the aesthetic of professional DSLR portraits, flattering facial features and adding a pleasing sense of depth.

Top score Best
Zoom

Beyond the main camera, OPPO has equipped the Find X8 Ultra with a well-balanced triple secondary camera setup, enabling consistently strong performance across the entire zoom range. Whether capturing ultra-wide shots or distant telephoto images, the device delivers high dynamic range, accurate exposure, vivid colors, and a high level of detail in both photos and videos. This comprehensive imaging capability makes the OPPO Find X8 Ultra the best current zoom performer available, thanks to a consistent Photo and Video zoom capabilities. In our tests, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra delivered impressive video zoom image quality, helping it secure the top spot in the overall zoom ranking, even though it placed just behind the Xiaomi 15 Ultra in our Photo-only category.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where 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 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.

Oppo Find X8 Ultra Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo 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

170

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

Best

i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as 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, landscape and zoom 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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

In a highly competitive flagship smartphone market, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra stands out as a true breakthrough in mobile photography. Featuring a meticulously engineered camera system, it delivers an exceptional imaging experience tailored to both everyday users and serious content creators.

The device excels in exposure control, leveraging HDR to enhance contrast and preserve detail even in complex lighting scenarios such as backlit or high-contrast environments. This wide dynamic range is especially effective in challenging situations like sunsets or mixed indoor lighting, ensuring balanced highlights and shadows throughout the frame.

Whether capturing vibrant landscapes or subtle skin tones, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra renders colors that are both lifelike and vivid, avoiding the oversaturated or unnatural look found in some competing devices. Even under difficult lighting conditions, the camera maintains excellent tonal balance, giving images a true-to-life quality. Detail retention is outstanding. Fine textures from intricate fabrics to distant foliage are captured with precision, and advanced noise reduction algorithms keep grain under control, even in low-light settings. The result is consistently clean, crisp imagery across a wide range of scenarios. The autofocus system is fast, reliable, and highly responsive. It effectively locks onto subjects and freezes motion with ease, making it ideal for dynamic scenes like children at play or pets in action. This responsiveness ensures that users can consistently capture decisive moments without hesitation.

With its cutting-edge features and thoughtful engineering, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra sets a new benchmark for mobile photography in 2025.

Main

175

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

177

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
Oppo Find X8 Ultra Photo scores
The photo Main 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 at 1x.
Close-Up

Like many recent flagship devices, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra offers multiple macro capture options. By default, it automatically switches to the ultra-wide camera for close-up shots, but users also have the option to use the telephoto lens in macro mode for added versatility.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra – Good level of detail, accurate focus, vivid colors
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Good level of detail, slight focus inaccuracy, vivid colors
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Good level of detail, accurate focus, slight desaturation
Exposure
130

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

131

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

In our tests, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra consistently delivered well-exposed subjects across a wide range of lighting conditions, supported by its extended dynamic range.

OPPO has made excellent use of the HDR format, leveraging it to enhance contrast and ensure portraits appear visually striking, with subjects clearly standing out from their backgrounds. This high level of exposure control and effective HDR rendering places the Find X8 Ultra at the top of our exposure performance ranking.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra – Wide dynamic range, good exposure and contrast
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Wide dynamic range, good exposure and contrast
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Wide dynamic range, slight lack of contrast
Color
129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

130

Xiaomi 15 Ultra
i

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 according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

In our tests, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra stood out for its ability to deliver natural and consistent color rendering across a wide range of lighting conditions. It was particularly impressive in its handling of skin tones, maintaining a realistic and pleasing appearance in various scenarios. While minor color casts were occasionally observed (and some images could benefit from slightly more neutral tones) these casts generally reflected the actual ambient lighting and appeared natural rather than artificial.

When capturing in HDR, color rendering is further enhanced, taking full advantage of the format’s extended tonal capabilities. This results in images with improved depth, better color balance, and more faithful reproduction of complex lighting environments.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra – Natural colors, pleasant warm cast
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Slightly cold cast
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Cold cast
Autofocus
123

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

126

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

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.

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 5Lux Δ0EV Tungsten Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as 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 in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. 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.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Diana setup: 10000Lux Δ0EV D55 Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 10000 Lux with D55 illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, the higher the JOD is the more details are visible on the face. And the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Eugene setup: 5Lux Δ0EV 2700K Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 5 Lux with LED 2700K illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

The OPPO Find X8 Ultra features a fast and reliable autofocus system, capable of accurately locking onto subjects and effectively freezing motion when needed. This responsiveness makes it easier to capture decisive moments, particularly in dynamic scenes, where other devices may struggle or introduce motion-related artifacts.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra – Motion is effectively frozen at the moment the shutter is triggered
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Moment is not exactly frozen when the shutter is triggered
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Moment is effectively frozen when the shutter is triggered. Fusion artifact is visible on the ball

While the OPPO Find X8 Ultra does not feature a variable aperture like Huawei’s recent flagships (resulting in a naturally shallower depth of field when multiple subjects are positioned at different distances) it can, in certain conditions, compensate through software processing. This allows the device to recover detail and render the subject in focus.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra - Group Portrait
OPPO Find X8 Ultra - Subject appears in focus
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Group Portrait
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Subject is out of focus
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Group portrait
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Subject in focus
Texture
131

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

Best

i

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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for 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.

The OPPO Find X8 Ultra ranks at the top of our database for detail preservation. Across a wide range of conditions, it consistently delivers a high level of detail with natural, realistic rendering, particularly noticeable in portrait shots. Compared to other leading flagship devices, it outperforms competitors in challenging lighting environments, such as low light or night scenes, where it retains fine textures and minimizes detail loss more effectively.

 

OPPO Find X8 Ultra - Night scene
OPPO Find X8 Ultra - Details are well preserved
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Night scene
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Slight loss of details
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Night scene
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Details are slightly unnatural
Noise
129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

Best

i

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 0.1 to 10000 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

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. The lower the JND is the less noise is visible on the patches of the Dead Leaves chart.

Our testers observed that the OPPO Find X8 Ultra excels at maintaining low noise levels across most conditions. In bright lighting, noise is virtually nonexistent, comparable to the best flagship devices. In low-light scenarios, the phone effectively reduces noise while preserving fine details and maintaining a natural texture rendering.

 

OPPO Find X8 Ultra - Lowlight scene
OPPO Find X8 Ultra - Very slight noise, natural rendering
Apple iPhone 16 Pro max - Lowlight scene
Apple iPhone 16 Pro max - Noise is visible
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Lowlight scene
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Very slight noise, slightly unnatural rendering
Artifacts
74

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

80

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, 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

Bokeh

175

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

Best

i

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.

While some competitors struggle to deliver artifact-free Portrait mode images, often producing results with lower quality than their main photo mode due to simulated DSLR-style blur, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra performs well in both areas.

Its Portrait mode features highly accurate depth estimation, enabling precise subject-background separation even around fine details such as individual hairs. Moreover, the overall image quality in Portrait mode matches that of the main photo mode, offering excellent detail retention, accurate exposure, and natural color reproduction. This combination establishes the Find X8 Ultra as the current leader in smartphone portrait photography.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra - Portrait outdoor scene
OPPO Find X8 Ultra - Accurate depth estimation even on very fine details
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Portrait outdoor scene
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Depth artifact is visible on fine details around the subject

Tele

161

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

166

Xiaomi 15 Ultra
i

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.

Oppo Find X8 Ultra Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

The telephoto performance of the OPPO Find X8 Ultra is one of its key strengths, featuring a dual-telephoto setup with a 50MP short telephoto and a 50MP periscope long telephoto module. Both modules represent an upgrade over the OPPO Find X8 Pro, incorporating larger sensors and lenses that allow more light to enter. Thanks to its advanced hardware, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra consistently high levels of detail across the entire zoom range, from the primary camera to the long-range telephoto. Its telephoto capabilities are very close to the best-in-class, rivaling devices like the Xiaomi 15 Ultra.

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
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
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
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.
OPPO Find X8 Ultra - Long tele scene, equivalent 200mm
OPPO Find X8 Ultra- Good detail preservation
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Long tele scene, equivalent 200mm
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Details are lost
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Long tele scene, equivalent 200mm
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Unnatural detail rendering

UltraWide

139

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

158

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

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.

Oppo Find X8 Ultra Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

The Ultra-Wide camera of the OPPO FindX8 Ultra delivers a very good image quality, with accurate exposure, natural color reproduction, and a high level of detail in most shooting conditions. Similar to the main camera, this module produces images with realistic skin tones and finely rendered facial details, as well as well-balanced white tones and textures across the entire scene. While the ultra-wide camera’s field of view is slightly narrower compared to the best modules found in some competitors, its overall performance remains consistently strong.

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
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
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
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.
OPPO Find X8 Ultra – Good exposure, high level of detail, natural color rendering
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Good exposure, high dynamic range, slight loss of details, slight color cast
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Slight underexposure, good level of detail

Video

166

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

Best

i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 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 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

The OPPO Find X8 Ultra offers a variety of video modes, including 4K at 30fps in HDR format, and supports up to 4K at 120fps with Dolby Vision 10-bit HDR.

In our tests using the 4K 30fps HDR setting, the video performance proved to be outstanding, rivaling the current best-in-class in our database, the Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max. The device consistently delivers smooth and accurate exposure across diverse shooting conditions, with natural, vivid color reproduction and excellent rendering of skin tones. The autofocus system is fast and fluid, intelligently adapting focus based on the scene, such as when detecting faces. Mirroring its photographic strengths, the Find X8 Ultra maintains a high level of detail and exhibits minimal noise in most scenarios.

As with other HDR-capable devices, viewing the enhanced HDR footage requires an HDR-compatible display. It’s important to note that platforms like YouTube will only stream the original HDR version when played on an HDR-enabled screen; otherwise, a compressed SDR version will be displayed.

Main

176

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

179

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
Oppo Find X8 Ultra Video scores
Video Main 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.
Exposure
123

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

Best

i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

Similar to its photo capabilities, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra features a high dynamic range in video, delivering accurate exposure across a wide range of lighting conditions. It handles transitions between varying light levels smoothly and leverages the HDR format effectively to produce videos with impressive contrast and vibrant, luminous highlights.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra – Wide dynamic range, accurate target exposure, smooth transitions

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Wide dynamic range, accurate target exposure, smooth transitions

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Wide dynamic range, accurate target exposure, smooth transitions
Color
126

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

Best

i

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.

The OPPO FindX8 Ultra delivered a highly satisfying color experience. As in Photo mode, its color rendering is accurate and natural, effectively capturing the atmosphere across a variety of scenes while maintaining realistic skin tones. Exposure handling is also excellent, with smooth and seamless adaptation to changing lighting conditions.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra – Accurate skin tones, pleasant warm cast

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Accurate skin tones, pleasant neutral cast

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Accurate skin tones, pleasant neutral cast
Autofocus
122

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

124

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
i

For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.

The OPPO Find X8 Ultra delivers an accurate autofocus in our tests, demonstrating strong tracking capabilities and smooth transitions between subjects, even in dynamic scenes.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra – Focus changes on the visible subject

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Focus is not reacting to the change

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Focus change on the visible subject
Texture
116

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

Best

i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

Mirroring its photographic performance, the device maintains a high level of detail in video, delivering natural and finely rendered textures with minimal artifacts, even under challenging lighting conditions. Its detail retention surpasses that of many leading flagships to date.

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.
Noise
120

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

124

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Noise levels on the OPPO Find X8 Ultra were minimal in most conditions, virtually imperceptible in bright light, with only slight noise indoors, and a well-controlled, acceptable level in low-light scenarios.

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.
Stabilization
120

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

122

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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.

The device’s stabilization capabilities are impressive, delivering very steady video footage across both static and highly dynamic movements under various lighting conditions. It maintains consistent sharpness between frames and enables smooth panning for fluid motion capture.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra – Very effective stabilization

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Very effective stabilization

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Effective stabilization
Artifacts
79

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

87

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

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

UltraWide

139

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

145

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

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
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
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
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.

Tele

130

Oppo Find X8 Ultra

Best

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
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
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
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.

As with still images, the OPPO Find X8 Ultra leverages its high-end hardware effectively for video capture across all cameras, from ultra-wide to long telephoto. While some visible transitions occur when zooming in and out, either via pinch gestures or zoom buttons, these shifts do not significantly impact the overall smoothness of the video. Changes in field of view and focus adaptation remain fluid and acceptable. Across the entire zoom range, the device consistently delivers high detail levels, accurate color reproduction, and a wide dynamic range.

OPPO Find X8 Ultra – Slight loss of details

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Slight loss of details

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Visible loss of details, unnatural rendering

The post OPPO Find X8 Ultra Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/oppo-find-x8-ultra-camera-test/feed/ 0 Best Best Best Best Best Best Best 002_OppoFindX8Ultra_DxOMark_Edito_ref 002_HuaweiPura70Ultra_DxOMark_Edito_ref 002 (3)_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_Edito_ref StreetLampsBokeh_OppoFindX8Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 StreetLampsBokeh_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 StreetLampsBokeh_HuaweiPura70Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 Best Best Best Best FlowerMacro_OppoFindX8Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 FlowerMacro_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 FlowerMacro_HuaweiPura70Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 BushWindow_OppoFindX8Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 BushWindow_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 BushWindow_HuaweiPura70Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 006_OppoFindX8Ultra_DxOMark_Edito_ref 006 (2)_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_Edito_ref 006_HuaweiPura70Ultra_DxOMark_Edito_ref Handball_OppoFindX8Ultra_DxOMark_P03_05-00 Handball_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 Handball_HuaweiPura70Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 Best Best Best 16mm_TrapezeParcNorth_OppoFindX8Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 16mm_TrapezeParcNorth_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 16mm_TrapezeParcNorth_HuaweiPura70Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 Best Best Best Best Best Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max Camera test – Retested https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-16-pro-max-camera-test-retested/ https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-16-pro-max-camera-test-retested/#respond Wed, 25 Jun 2025 17:14:29 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=184251&preview=true&preview_id=184251 We put the Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max 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 [...]

The post Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max Camera test – Retested appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max 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 sensor, quad pixels, 24mm equivalent f/1.78-aperture lens, Dual Pixel AF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 48MP sensor, 13mm equivalent f/2.2-aperture lens, Dual Pixel AF
  • Tele: 12MP sensor, 120 mm equivalent f/2.8-aperture lens, Dual Pixel AF
  • A18 Pro chipset

Scoring

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

Apple iPhone 16 Pro
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
161
camera
158
Photo
Main
168

177

Bokeh
160

175

Ultra-Wide
137

158

Tele
133

166

166
Video
Main
179

Best

Ultra-Wide
145

Best

Tele
122

130

Use cases & Conditions

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

BEST 159

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 182

Outdoor

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

BEST 172

Indoor

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

BEST 146

Lowlight

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

BEST 151

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Best video mode on a smartphone
  • Excellent for taking pictures and videos of friends and family
  • Wide dynamic range across the entire zoom range
  • Accurate white balance and natural color rendering
  • Excellent levels of detail and texture in bright light
  • Fast and accurate autofocus
  • Effective video stabilization

Cons

  • Inconsistent detail across zoom range, lack of detail in ultra-wide photos
  • Narrow depth of field results in out-of-focus background subjects in group shots
  • Unwanted artifacts, including flare, ghosting, ringing, and aliasing
  • Slightly low face brightness in backlit conditions
  • Noticeable grain present in most lighting conditions

 

Like its predecessors, the latest Apple flagship, the iPhone 16 Pro Max, did very well in the DXOMARK Camera tests, achieving an overall score that puts it among the very best smartphones for imaging. It shone particularly in video mode where it delivered better results than any other mobile device we have tested. It notably outperforms its main competitor, the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra, in this area and in photography overall.

Even though the primary camera hardware on the Pro Max remained mostly unchanged over the previous model, Apple still managed to make improvements in a range of image quality and camera performance areas. In video mode, the new iPhone again managed to grab the top spot in our ranking, thanks to outstanding test results across the board at 4K resolution and with the 60fps variable frame rate. In addition, the Apple flagship comes with a new 4K /120fps mode and a range of “Pro” modes that allow for customization of settings and are, in this form, not available on competing devices. In photo mode, the camera benefited from improved processing and new editing options. We particularly noticed an improved color performance at default settings.

While the overall rate of improvement in camera performance appears to be slower than in previous years and compared to the competition, users of the new iPhone benefit from the introduction of new imaging features, such as the Undertones and Mood photographic styles, which are not covered by the DXOMARK Camera test protocol, but are designed to address real user needs.

While the 16 Pro Max has noticeably improved in terms of both photo and video, this is not the case for zooming. Our testers did not notice any particular texture improvements with the new 48MP ultra-wide camera when compared to the 15 Pro Max. There was also still a lack of image quality consistency across the tele zoom range, with a noticeable drop in detail at tele settings between 2x and 5x.

BEST 146
Lowlight

The iPhone 16 Pro Max comes with an effective automatic night mode, that allows for the capture of bright pictures with a wide dynamic range, even in very low-light scenes. On the downside, image noise was more intrusive, and detail levels were lower in night shots than on the best competitors, such as the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra, factors that can be relevant for exigent photographers.

Low-light video performance, on the other hand, was outstanding. Overall, the Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max is the best device we have tested to date for filming in challenging low-light conditions, capturing almost noise-free footage with very high levels of detail.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Bright exposure, some loss of details
BEST 159
Portrait

In our tests, we found the iPhone 16 Pro Max to be an excellent device for both capturing portraits and the decisive moment in scenes with motion. The camera delivered excellent skin tones as well as high levels of detail on faces. Zero shutter lag technology allowed for instant capture when the shutter button is pressed. Viewing the iPhone 16 Pro Max images on an HDR screen made them look even more immersive and beautiful. On the downside, a limited depth of field meant that in group shots faces at the back could be slightly out of focus.

 Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Well-balanced dynamic range and face exposure, pleasantly warm skin-tone rendering. Slightly low face brightness when displayed on HDR monitor.
BEST 151
Zoom

As with the brand’s previous model, image quality lacks consistency across the telephoto zoom range, with a noticeable loss of detail between the 2x and 5x zoom levels. At longer zoom ranges, it still lags behind competitors, particularly the Xiaomi 15 Ultra, which leads in this area. On the video front, the iPhone 16 Pro Max performs well, especially in terms of field of view and smooth adaptation of camera controls during zoom transitions.

 Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Approx 170mm eq or 7x zoom ratio – Low level of details

 

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where 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 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.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo 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

158

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

170

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as 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, landscape and zoom 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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

In our tests, the Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max proved to be one of the best devices for capturing HDR scenes and achieved the best results to date in the color category. Apple has managed to further improve its advanced HDR image format, expanding the dynamic range while keeping HDR-related artifacts, such as ghosting, well under control. This said, the new iPhone lagged slightly behind the best in class in terms of texture/noise trade-off. It is also worth mentioning that, unlike more recent Huawei flagship phones, the iPhone 16 Pro Max does not feature a hardware (or physical) variable aperture. It can therefore not widen the depth-of-field in scenes where this would make sense, for example, group shots with subjects at different distances from the camera.

Images captured with the Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max looked stunning – brighter and more vivid than ever before – when viewed in the iPhone Photo App on the device display, or on a MacBook running macOS Sequoia. However, when using a display and player that does not support Apple’s HDR format, the effect was not quite the same, as images are displayed as a standard JPG file, without the HDR effect. Please note that the Google Pixel 9 Pro XL and the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra sample images will be correctly displayed on this page when using a display and browser that support Ultra HDR formats. This is not the case for photos taken with Apple and Huawei devices.

Please note that the iPhone 16 Pro Max offers Raw file capture in DNG format, which allows for adjustment of some image parameters in post-production. However, Raw capture is not covered by our test protocol and therefore not covered in this article.

Main

168

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

177

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max Photo scores
The photo Main 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 at 1x.
Close-Up

Like last year’s iPhone, the iPhone 16 Pro Max comes with an automatic macro mode that uses the camera’s ultra-wide module. In our tests, close-up image quality and performance were similarly good as on the predecessor 15 Pro Max. When compared to the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra, which deploys its tele module in macro mode, the iPhone’s image results lagged slightly behind, with more intrusive image noise and less intense background blur, which some macro photographers might actually prefer.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Good macro detail, no background blur, cool cast
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Good macro detail, no background blur, cool cast
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Natural level of detail at the center of the frame, progressive blur, warm cast
Exposure
125

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

131

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

In our tests, the iPhone 16 Pro Max offered good target exposure, with better contrast and a wider dynamic range than the previous generation. The latest Apple flagship is now among the very best devices for exposure.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Wide dynamic range

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Limited dynamic range, highlight clipping in background
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Highlight clipping in background, contrast issues on subject

Apple has managed to further improve the HDR processing of its still images, achieving a wide dynamic range, with natural detail preservation in bright and dark areas while keeping artifacts well under control.

On the display side, most competitors offer some form of HDR rendering, with their proprietary HDR format. They all make use of the headroom for background highlights, but differ in the usage on the scene’s main subject. As seen below, Apple and Huawei arguably emphasize the scene’s main subject, compared to Samsung, on this specific scene.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – HDR headroom usage visualization
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – HDR headroom usage visualization
Samsung  Galaxy S24 Ultra – HDR headroom usage visualization

This approach occasionally results in the iPhone 16 Pro Max rendering faces with slightly reduced brightness, particularly noticeable on darker skin tones or in backlit and HDR environments. In developing our Camera v6 protocol, we integrated extensive user feedback gathered through studies and insights. As this type of rendering is generally less appreciated by users, it is now explicitly penalized in the latest version of the protocol.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Slightly low brightness on face when viewed on an HDR monitor
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Preferred brightness on face
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Preferred brightness on face
Color
129

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

130

Xiaomi 15 Ultra
i

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 according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

The iPhone 16 Pro Max is among the best devices in the color category, thanks to excellent and stable color rendering under most conditions.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Natural colors and pleasantly warm skin tones
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slightly blueish/greenish cast, cool skin tones
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Slightly pinkish cast, darker exposure.

In addition, the device offers a wide range of options for color customization, which can be applied before or after capture. This feature is not covered by our test protocol but is still worth mentioning as it has the potential to meet a real user need, allowing for the fine-tuning of skin-tone rendering in line with personal preferences.

Users can choose from two families of color options:

  • Undertones allows for subtle adjustment of skin tones but also affects the rest of the scene. Options include cool rose, gold, rose gold, amber, and neutral,  all of which can be fine-tuned using a pad-like color control on the display.
  • Mood is designed to change the mood of a scene. It is applied in the same way as Undertones but has a stronger impact. Options include Vibrant, Natural, Luminous, Dramatic, Quiet, Cozy and Ethereal. Like for Undertones, the same images can be edited and saved multiple times with various Moods applied.
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – AMBER Undertone
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – COOL ROSE Undertone
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – GOLD Undertone
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – ROSE GOLD  Undertone – Our model Yannick’s favorite
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – NEUTRAL Undertone
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – STANDARD (default)
Autofocus
119

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

126

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

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.

In our tests, the latest iPhone offered a zero shutter lag in most conditions, resulting in instant capture of the scene as the shutter button is pressed. This made it quite easy to capture the decisive moment in moving scenes. Some rivals, for example, the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra, do not offer a zero shutter lag in high-contrast scenes, making capturing scenes with motion a much more difficult task.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Image captured when shutter button was pressed
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Image capture when shutter button was pressed
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Image captured after shutter button press, subject not in desired position

This said, unlike some rivals, for example, the Google Pixel 9, the iPhone was not capable of instant capture in very low light conditions.

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 5Lux Δ0EV Tungsten Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as 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 in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. 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.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Diana setup: 10000Lux Δ0EV D55 Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 10000 Lux with D55 illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Eugene setup: 5Lux Δ0EV 2700K Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 5 Lux with LED 2700K illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

Like the iPhone 15 generation, the latest Apple device, is not capable of adapting depth of field to scene content. Some rivals are a step ahead of Apple in this respect. The Google Pixel 9 Pro XL comes with an AI feature that is capable of sharpening detail in slightly out-of-focus background faces in group shots. Huawei’s latest flagship features a variable aperture and automatically stops down if it makes sense for a particular scene. This widens the depth of field and maintains better focus on all faces in group portraits.

 

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Group Portrait
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Limited depth of field, background face out of focus

 

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Group Portrait
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Wide depth of field, thanks to automatic aperture adaptation

 

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL - Group Portrait
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL - Background face slightly deblurred

 

Texture
128

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

131

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for 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.

Our testers found the 16 Pro Max to be one of the very best smartphones for capturing detail. This is especially true in daylight or under bright artificial light, and most noticeable when looking closely at fine skin texture in close-up portraits. Skin rendering in portraits was very natural, with subtle local contrast and nicely captured finest detail, for example in the hair, on the lips or wrinkles.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Portrait
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - High levels of detail
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL - Portrait
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL - Slightly lower levels of detail
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Portrait
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Lower levels of detail, unatural rendering

In low light, we observed some loss of detail. Like the predecessor iPhone 15 Pro Max, the new model uses pixel binning in dim conditions, producing lower resolution (12MP) image files.

Noise
118

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10000 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
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.

Image noise is one of the most important areas for improvement on the iPhone 16 Pro Max. In our tests, grainy luminance noise was noticeable across all test conditions. In bright light and at small viewing sizes noise was not much of an issue but when taking images in low light and/or viewing them on a larger display, noise could become quite intrusive. Most of the iPhone’s direct rivals are capable of better managing image noise, with almost noise-free areas of plain color and still good detail in textured elements of the scene.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Lowlight Portrait
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Visible grain
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Lowlight Portrait
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra - Low level of noise
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL - Lowlight Portrait
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL - Slight noise
Artifacts
74

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

80

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, 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

Image artifacts were overall well managed on the iPhone 16 Pro Max. Our testers still observed some flare and ghosting effects, but both artifacts were slightly less noticeable than on last year’s flagship.

Bokeh

160

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

175

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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.

Like its predecessor, the iPhone 16 Pro Max produced pleasant image results in bokeh mode, with a nice blur effect on the background as well as pretty good depth simulation and subject isolation, especially when compared to the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra. Still, the latest Apple flagship was not quite up there with the very best in terms of bokeh simulation, due to the shape and contrast of spotlights in the background.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Depth artifacts around the earrings, lack of face detail
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Depth artifacts around the earrings, very saturated skin tones
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra – Excellent subject segmentation, large spotlight simulation

By default, the iPhone uses a 2x zoom setting in bokeh mode. Please note that the device also lets you switch to a 1x and 5x tele zoom in portrait mode. This is not covered by the DXOMARK Camera test protocol, however. At the longest setting, the tele module is used for capture.

Tele

133

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

166

Xiaomi 15 Ultra
i

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.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

The iPhone 16 Pro Max comes with a new 48MP ultra-wide module. The 5x tele module is now available on both the Pro and Pro Max versions of the iPhone. In our tests, we did not see any major image quality improvements compared to last year’s models. At close-range tele settings, between the primary and tele camera modules, a lack of processing and image fusion still means the iPhone is not quite up there with the very best.

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
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
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
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.

The 16 Pro Max comes with the same 5x tele camera module as last year’s 15 Pro Max. We were hoping for some improvements at intermediate zoom factors, but image quality, especially image detail, remained inconsistent across the tele zoom range, due to a lack of adequate hardware or software solutions. In our tests, there was a noticeable drop-off in detail after zooming in more than 2x, until the tele camera takes over at 5x. Competitors like Google’s Pixel 9 Pro XL use super-resolution algorithms or image fusion methods to produce more consistent image detail along the tele zoom range.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - 110mm eq. tele
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Lack of detail
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - 110mm eq. tele
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Lack of detail, overprocessed
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL - 110mm eq. tele
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL - Higher levels of detail
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - 180mm eq.
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Low level of details, unnatural detail rendering
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - 180mm eq.
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Low level of details, unnatural detail rendering
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - 180mm eq.
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Higher level of details

The iPhone 16 Pro Max lets you switch between a 28mm and 35mm equivalent focal length by tapping on the 1x button in the camera app. The feature, called Fusion Camera, is interesting from a user interface perspective and provides an additional standard focal length that is widely used in many types of photography. Examining the images, there is no loss of detail, with the 35mm equivalent shots showing even better fine detail in our tests. This suggests the device is using more than just a simple crop in order to achieve the desired field of view.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - 24mm
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - 24mm
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - 28mm
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - 28mm
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - 35mm
Apple iPhone 16 ProMax - 35mm

UltraWide

137

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

158

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
i

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.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

Despite a nominally higher 48MP pixel count on the ultra-wide camera, our testers could not observe any improvements in detail, neither in the lab nor in real-life scenes, at ultra-wide settings.  Image files at 48MP are only recorded when using the device’s proRAW mode. On the plus side, in most test scenes, our experts found dynamic range to be improved over the iPhone 15 Pro Max.

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
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
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
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.

Video

166

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

Best

i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 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 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

The Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max’s video mode was tested at 4K resolution, a 60fps variable frame rate, and in Dolby Vision format. These settings delivered exceptional results, earning Apple’s latest flagship the top position in our video ranking. Video exposure and color accuracy remained highly consistent across a range of recording conditions, and the texture/noise trade-off was the best we’ve seen on any device tested to date. The autofocus system performed reliably, even in low light, and video stabilization ranked among the best in the market.

Not only did the iPhone 16 Pro Max deliver the best video quality in its standard and default video modes, it also offered additional features that will delight video professionals, such as several proRes (Log and HDR) modes. There is also a new 4K/120fps mode that looks like a great option for slow-motion video, at least when recording in good light. When using the fast frame rate under indoor lighting or in low light, there was noticeably more noise and flickering than at 60fps.

Like on the iPhone 15 generation and other devices with HDR video capability, an HDR-compatible display is required to fully take advantage of the enhanced HDR footage. It is important to note that YouTube will only show the original HDR version of a clip if viewed on an HDR screen. Otherwise, a compressed SDR version will be displayed.

Main

179

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

Best

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max Video scores
Video Main 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.
Exposure
121

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

123

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

Like its predecessors, the iPhone 16 Pro Max ranks among the very best devices for video exposure, thanks to its well-managed HDR format, one of the widest dynamic ranges in the business, and very smooth exposure transitions. This said, our testers noticed slightly more intrusive tone mapping instabilities than on the 15 Pro Max.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Wide dynamic range, accurate target exposure

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Wide dynamic range, accurate target exposure

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Wide dynamic range, accurate target exposure

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Smooth exposure transitions

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Smooth exposure transitions

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Smooth but slightly slower exposure transitions
Color
125

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

126

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 in photo mode, the iPhone 16 Pro Max delivered an excellent performance for video color. Colors and skin tones were natural across all test conditions, with a pleasantly warm cast in low light. In addition, color transitions during scene changes were managed very well.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Accurate skin tones, pleasantly warm cast

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Accurate skin tones, pleasantly warm cast

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Slightly inaccurate skin tones

Please note that Apple’s new photographic styles are also available in video mode.

Autofocus
118

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

124

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
i

For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.

Video focus performance was very close to last year’s model, with excellent tracking as well as fast and smooth transitions. During our tests, the iPhone 16 Pro Max rarely lost focus on the main subject of a video scene. The field of view adjustment that comes with focus changes was usually well-corrected but still slightly noticeable. The Huawei Pura 70 Ultra did slightly better in this respect.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Smooth focus adaptation

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Smooth focus adaptation

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Stepping during focus adaptation
Texture
115

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

116

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

The iPhone 16 Pro Max was able to improve over its predecessor in terms of detail rendering in video. Detail in video clips looked natural and was free of artifacts. Improvements were most noticeable in low light. This is particularly notable as the 16 Pro Max was tested at 60fps, which makes detail rendering more challenging than at slower frame rates.

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.
Noise
124

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

Best

i

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 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

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.

In our video tests, the new Apple flagship achieved the lowest noise levels of all devices tested to date. Noise was pretty much non-existent when recording in bright light or under typical indoor conditions. In low light, it was still pretty acceptable. Overall, the 16 Pro Max also offered the best detail/noise trade-off in video that we have seen so far.

Stabilization
122

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

Best

i

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 iPhone 16 Pro Max provided very good video stabilization that was on a similar level to the 15 Pro Max. Camera shake when hand-holding the camera was usually well compensated for, and sharpness was very consistent across the individual video frames.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Very effective stabilization

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Very effective stabilization

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Effective stabilization
Artifacts
87

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

Best

i

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

Like on the iPhone 15 Pro Max, a fast 60fps frame rate contributed to a reduction of unwanted artifacts, particularly the judder effect, which can occur during panning shots. Our testers observed other common artifacts, such as aliasing, flare, and ringing, in some scenes, but their impact on overall quality was usually fairly small. Flare could be quite noticeable in some scenes with the sun, or a strong light source inside the frame, but this is common to most flagship devices.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Smooth panning, no judder effect

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Smooth panning, no judder effect

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL – Judder effect

Tele

122

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

130

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 50 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

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
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
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.

UltraWide

145

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

Best

i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 30 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

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
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
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.

While the iPhone 16 Pro Max falls behind the competition in photo zoom performance, it excels in video zoom, particularly in the smoothness of zoom transitions. Although switches between different camera modules and modes are still perceptible, there are no major jumps in field of view or abrupt exposure shifts. Overall, the behavior is particularly better than that of its competitors. Image quality is generally solid, featuring an extended dynamic range and the availability of the HDR format.

The post Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max Camera test – Retested appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-16-pro-max-camera-test-retested/feed/ 0 Apple iPhone 16 Pro Best Best LaConciergerie_Apple_iPhone16Promax AppleiPhone16ProMax (1) 2260_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark AppleiPhone16ProMax (4) AppleiPhone15ProMax (7) HuaweiPura70Ultra (7) PeopleWorkingTableFar_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 PeopleWorkingTableFar_GooglePixel9ProXL_DxOMark_05-00 PeopleWorkingTableFar_SamsungGalaxyS24Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 iPhone16ProMax_GainMapVisu_Histo HuaweiPura70Ultra_GainMapVisu_Histo SamsungS24Ultra_GainMapVisu_Histo Liana_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 Liana_HuaweiPura70Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 Liana_GooglePixel9ProXL_DxOMark_05-00 AppleiPhone16ProMax (21) AppleiPhone15ProMax (3) GooglePixel9ProXL (5) AMBER COOLROSE GOLD ROSE_GOLD NEUTRAL Standard CatWalk_AppleiPhone16ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 CatWalk_GooglePixel9ProXL_DxOMark_05-00 CatWalk_SamsungGalaxyS24Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 AppleiPhone16ProMax (1) SamsungGalaxyS24Ultra (1) HuaweiPura70Ultra (1) Best Best Best Best Best Best