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, 18 Dec 2025 11:24:04 +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 FE Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s25-fe-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s25-fe-camera-test/#respond Thu, 18 Dec 2025 11:24:04 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=189109&preview=true&preview_id=189109 We put the Samsung Galaxy S25 FE through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results [...]

The post Samsung Galaxy S25 FE Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Samsung Galaxy S25 FE through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50 MP, f/1.8, 24mm (wide), 1/1.57″, 1.0µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 12 MP, f/2.2, 13mm, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1/3.0″, 1.12µm
  • Tele: 8 MP, f/2.4, 75mm (telephoto), 1/4.4″, 1.0µm, PDAF, OIS, 3x optical zoom

Scoring

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


Samsung Galaxy S25 FE
118
camera
130
Photo
Main
133

184

Bokeh
150

175

Ultra-Wide
143

169

Tele
112

169

98
Video
Main
125

186

Ultra-Wide
14

148

Tele
41

140

Use cases & Conditions

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

BEST 169

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 185

Outdoor

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

BEST 180

Indoor

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

BEST 147

Lowlight

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

BEST 159

Zoom

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

Pros

  • Target exposure is often accurate in photo.
  • Color rendering is often pleasant with accurate white balance in photo.
  • Level of details is good in bright conditions in photo and Video.
  • Dynamic range is pretty extended in Video

Cons

  • Target exposure is often slightly underexposed especially in HDR conditions for Video
  • White balance is often pink with desaturated colors in Video
  • Noise can be visible even in bright conditions in photo and video
  • Level of details is low while using bokeh mode
  • Residual motion can be visible in motion or static videos in Video
  • Some artifacts are visible such as hue shift, flare and fusion artifacts in photo.

 

The Samsung Galaxy S25 FE is the fan edition of the S25 series. Unlike its flagship counterpart, which is powered by a Snapdragon chipset, the FE version relies on the Exynos 2400. While the main camera module is largely unchanged from the S25, the telephoto module has a slightly lower resolution (8 MP vs. 10 MP), and the ultra-wide module appears less capable in terms of overall performance.

In terms of image quality, the S25 FE ranks lower in our database. Still photos generally show good quality, but results can be inconsistent, particularly for color rendering and exposure. Bokeh mode struggles to retain fine detail and can appear soft in low-light conditions. The ultra-wide camera captures solid images, but it does not support 4K 60 fps video recording. The telephoto module also underperforms, with noticeable loss of detail in indoor and low-light scenarios.

Video performance falls behind many competitors. Footage is often slightly pinkish and underexposed, and overall detail retention is limited, particularly in challenging lighting conditions.

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 FE 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

130

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE

180

Huawei Pura 80 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

133

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE

184

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Samsung Galaxy S25 FE 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.
Samsung Galaxy S25 FE – Accurate target exposure, pleasant color rendering on SDR scenes
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.
Texture
117

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE

132

Vivo X200 Ultra
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.
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.

Tele

112

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE

169

Huawei Pura 80 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.

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE 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.

UltraWide

143

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE

169

Vivo X200 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.

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE 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.

Video

98

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE

172

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
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

125

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE

186

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Samsung Galaxy S25 FE 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.

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE – Slightly underexposed, pinkish white balance

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Good target exposure, pleasant white balance

 

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

The post Samsung Galaxy S25 FE Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s25-fe-camera-test/feed/ 0 SamsungGalaxyS25FE Google Pixel 10 Pro XL Camera Test Video Boost https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-10-pro-xl-camera-test-video-boost/ https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-10-pro-xl-camera-test-video-boost/#respond Thu, 18 Dec 2025 09:51:37 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=188042&preview=true&preview_id=188042 We put the Google Pixel 10 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 10 Pro XL Camera Test Video Boost appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Google Pixel 10 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 1/1.3″ sensor, 1.2µm pixels, 25mm equivalent f/1.68-aperture lens, Octa PD, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 48MP 1/2.55″ sensor, 0.7µm pixels, 13mm equivalent f/1.7-aperture lens, Quad PD
  • Tele: 48MP 1/2.55″ sensor, 0.7µm pixels, 128mm equivalent f/2.8-aperture lens, Quad PD, OIS

Pros

  • Accurate and stable exposure and wide dynamic range
  • Accurate white balance with generally good skin tones
  • Few artifacts compared to competition
  • Very good texture/noise trade-off with fine detail and nearly no noise
  • Quite reliable autofocus with fast convergence
  • Good detail in tele and ultra wide videos

Cons

  • Target exposure on face slightly low on strong HDR scenes
  • Skin tones can be slightly too red on fair models in outdoor
  • Slight lack of detail in medium range zoom shots
  • Flare in some outdoor scenes

The Google Pixel 10 Pro XL Video boost mode delivered the best perfomance in the DXOMARK Camera video tests, earning itself a top score in our current ranking. This mode shows really impressive improvements compared to the basic video mode available on the camera. It enhances already good parts of the Pixel Video and compensate some lacks giving us an overall really good experience as a user.

Videos come with good exposure and a wide dynamic range, as well as generally nice colors and accurate white balance. Moreover, the on cloud treatement allows to correct nearly all unstabilities in terms of exposure and colors, offering very stable videos with smooth transitions between different light conditions. The main interest of this mode is the exceptionnal trade-off between noise reduction and detail retention in all conditions, especially in lowlight and night. It maintains a high level of fine details without having noise visible. Stabilization is also slightly improved compared to the normal mode.

Using the tele and the ultra wide module, video boost also allow us to have better video quality than the normal mode, giving it even better details and reducing drastically the noise visible on the videos. It still lacks of details at medium range, just before switching to its tele dedicated camera, but once it switches level of details is quite impressive.

Please note that our tests were conducted using an HDR compatible monitor. All image quality comments are based on viewing on such a monitor.

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 10 Pro XL (Video Boost) 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.

Video

175

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL

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 Google Pixel 10 Pro XL offers an interesting Video Boost mode, allowing the user to capture a video which will be treated on the cloud and downloaded automatically, ensuring a better quality than the on-phone videos. The final video produced can be up to 8K30fps, but we performed the tests at 4K 60fps. On the photo app two options are available, (Original quality or space saver) which will allows to have reduced sized videos (1080p). The upload and treatment process can be a bit long (1-2h for a 5s video) making it not really suitable yet for social medias but it is done automatically and the final video will be synchronized on the phone Photo app once ready.

Overall it is quite a game changer in terms of quality, ensuring a really stable experience with high level of texture and very low level of noise, offering the best video quality observed for a smartphone, outperforming the iPhone 17 Pro and of course the Pixel 10 Pro XL without VB.

Main

186

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL (Video Boost) 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
126

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL

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.

Pixel 10 Pro XL videos already offer a wide dynamic range and with good exposure in most conditions but the Video Boost allows an even better and stable exposure and dark recovery especially in lowlight conditions. The stability and the transitions in terms of exposure are also way smoother and natural. The only slight issue we noticed is in strong HDR conditions, the target exposure on face (especially on dark skin tones) tend to be slightly low, allowing a  good recovery of the highlights in the background, but the face can be slightly too dark and hard to read.

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL VB – Accurate exposure on both subjects, slight highlight clipping

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Target exposure slightly low on subjects, slight highlight clipping

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Accurate subject exposure, slight highlight clipping
Color
131

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL

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 Pixel 10 Pro is showing really good color rendering in most conditions. The Video Boost mode shows an improvement especially in terms of stability and adaptation. In bright and indoor conditions it offers a neutral and pleasant white balance, while in lowlight it tends to be more yellow green than orange. Color rendering is slightly different than the normal mode, with more vibrant colors and bluer skyes. We noticed in some cases that skin tones can be slightly too red in outdoor conditions on already red kind of skintones.

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL VB – Good color rendering and skin tones, neutral white balance, accurate exposure

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Good color rendering and skin tones, neutral white balance, slightly lower exposure

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Good color rendering and skin tones, warmer white balance, accurate exposure
Sharpness & Timing
116

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL

i

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

In terms of autofocus, the Video boost mode does not show a lot of difference as it is quite depend of the original videos from the Pixel 10 Pro XL.

Texture
119

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL

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.

One of the main quality of the Video Boost mode is the high level of details produced, especially compared to the original video from the Pixel 10 Pro. Fine details are very well preserved in bright conditions and still natural, and in lowlight it is better than most of the competition. Some slight local loss of details can be sometimes visible on flat areas in lowlight, but the Texture noise trade off is by far the best observed on a smartphone video.

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL VB – Fine details very well preserved, natural texture rendering

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Fine details well preserved, natural texture rendering

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Fine details well preserved, natural texture rendering
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
145

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL

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.

With the Video boost mode, noise is nearly not visible even in challenging or lowlight videos. Luminance noise disappear nearly completely without impacting the level of details. Some slight chromatic noise can be sometimes visible in really low light conditions.

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
124

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL

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 does a good job already on the Pixel 10 Pro XL, and is even better with the Video Boost. During static or motion, movement is well compensated in most light conditions.

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL VB – Slight camera shake when walking

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Slight camera shake when walking

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Walking motion well compensated for
Artifacts
82

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL

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

156

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL

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.

The Pixel 10 Pro XL VB offers a even better video zoom experience, especially when using the tele and ultra-wide camera modules. It uses the very wide ultra wide field to capture crisps details without visible noise in bright conditions. However, quality drop in low light, with more intrusive noise and also when zooming to the primary camera

Tele

135

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL

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 the Video Boost mode upgrade the results from the Pixel 10 Pro cameras, texture noise trade off is quite impressive when using its dedicated tele camera (at 5x and higher). Slight lack of details can also be noticeable at medium range (less than 5x) and jump between cameras can be noticeable.

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL VB – Good focus tracking, accurate exposure, lack of fine detail at the end of the clip

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Good focus tracking, slight underexposure while subject is moving, lack of fine detail at the end of the clip

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Good focus tracking, slight underexposure while subject is moving, lack of fine detail at the end of the clip

The post Google Pixel 10 Pro XL Camera Test Video Boost appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-10-pro-xl-camera-test-video-boost/feed/ 0 Apple Macbook Pro 14 (M5,2025) laptop test https://www.dxomark.com/apple-macbook-pro-14-m52025/ https://www.dxomark.com/apple-macbook-pro-14-m52025/#respond Tue, 16 Dec 2025 10:55:26 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=188690 We put the Apple Macbook Pro (M5, 2025) through our rigorous DXOMARK Laptop test suite to measure its performance in sound, camera and display. In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Pros Face exposure is often accurate with an extended dynamic [...]

The post Apple Macbook Pro 14 (M5,2025) laptop test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Apple Macbook Pro (M5, 2025) through our rigorous DXOMARK Laptop test suite to measure its performance in sound, camera and display. In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Scoring

Use-case and feature subscores included in the calculations of the global score


Apple MacBook Pro 14 (M5, 2025)
135
camera
Exposure
88

93

Texture
43

56

Color
67

79

Noise
85

Best

Pros

  • Face exposure is often accurate with an extended dynamic range in all tested conditions
  • Good noise control with well-preserved details
  • Subjects constantly appear in focus

Cons

  • Occasional white balance or color rendering inaccuracies
  • Fine details are sometimes less defined than those from competing models

Test summary

About DXOMARK Laptop tests: For scoring and analysis in our laptop reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests and undertake more than 20 hours of perceptual evaluations under controlled lab conditions and real-life scenarios. (For more details about the Laptop protocol, click here.)
The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations in the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

Camera

135

Apple MacBook Pro 14 (M5, 2025)

136

Apple MacBook Pro 14" (M4, 2024)
i
About DXOMARK Camera Laptop tests

DXOMARK evaluates the image quality of the built in camera during video calls, whether with a single person or with multiple people, in a variety of lighting conditions. Our camera evaluation particularly assesses the ability of the built-in camera to clearly render human faces during video calls. Other intrinsic camera quality aspects are also evaluated, like color reproduction, texture, and noise, as well as artifacts.

Learn more about how we test laptops

Discover the MacBook Pro (M5, 2025) with improved noise management and dynamic range, while retaining the best features of its predecessor

Overall, while the device maintains strong imaging fundamentals and even improves in noise performance, the reduced texture quality and narrower field of view represent minor trade-offs compared to its predecessor. Considering these relatively small changes, the MacBook Pro (M5,2025) does not bring significant advancements to the camera system and largely continues the performance profile established by previous generations.

The following chart presents the camera subscores for the video call use case:

Camera scores comparison
Camera texture acutance on Deadleaves with illuminance levels
This graph shows the evolution of texture acutance with the level of lux measured on a Deadleaves chart.
The following graphs show the objective measurements performed in our camera labs:
Camera visual noise evolution with illuminance levels
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.
Target exposure on face with illuminance levels
These measurements take place on a setup combining realistic mannequins and a backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. This graph shows the evolution of lightness measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin with the level of lux, for multiple lighting conditions. The lightness is measured in L*. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions.
Target exposure on face with illuminance levels in HDR conditions
These measurements take place on a setup combining realistic mannequins and a backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. This graph shows the evolution of lightness measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin with the level of lux, for multiple lighting conditions. The lightness is measured in L*. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions.
Target exposure on face with illuminance levels in HDR conditions
These measurements take place on a setup combining realistic mannequins and a backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. This graph shows the evolution of lightness measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin with the level of lux, for multiple lighting conditions. The lightness is measured in L*. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions.

The post Apple Macbook Pro 14 (M5,2025) laptop test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/apple-macbook-pro-14-m52025/feed/ 0 Best Samsung Galaxy S25 FE Display test https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s25-fe-display-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s25-fe-display-test/#respond Thu, 11 Dec 2025 14:41:21 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=189066&preview=true&preview_id=189066 We put the Samsung Galaxy S25 FE 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 AMOLED (~90.2% screen-to-body ratio) Dimensions: 161.3 x [...]

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

]]> We put the Samsung Galaxy S25 FE 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 AMOLED (~90.2% screen-to-body ratio)
  • Dimensions: 161.3 x 76.6 x 7.4 mm (6.35 x 3.02 x 0.29 inches)
  • Resolution: 1080 x 2340 pixels, (~385 ppi density)
  • Aspect ratio: None
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz

Scoring

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

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE
156
display
Readability
151

164

Color
161

167

Video
164

167

Touch
141

164

Eye Comfort Label & Attributes

Eye Comfort
<10%
Flicker perception probability
% of population
1.56
Minimum Brightness
in nits
0.56
Circadian Action Factor
 
99%
Color
Consistency
vs Display-P3 color space
DISPLAY
Position in Global Ranking
10th
1. Google Pixel 10 Pro XL
161
2. Google Pixel 10
160
2. Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
160
4. Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
158
4. Google Pixel 9 Pro
158
4. Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge
158
7. Honor Magic6 Pro
157
7. Samsung Galaxy S25+
157
7. Samsung Galaxy S25
157
10. Google Pixel 10 Pro Fold
156
10. Google Pixel 9
156
10. Samsung Galaxy S25 FE
156
13. Google Pixel 9a
155
13. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7
155
13. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7
155
13. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
155
17. Google Pixel 8 Pro
154
17. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold6
154
17. Samsung Galaxy S24+ (Exynos)
154
17. Samsung Galaxy S24 (Exynos)
154
21. Google Pixel 8
153
21. Honor Magic7 Pro
153
21. Vivo X100 Pro
153
24. Google Pixel 9 Pro Fold
152
24. Oppo Find X8 Pro
152
26. Apple iPhone Air
151
26. Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max
151
26. Apple iPhone 17
151
26. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
151
26. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
151
26. Honor Magic V2
151
26. Honor Magic5 Pro
151
26. Honor 200 Pro
151
34. Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
150
34. Apple iPhone 16 Pro
150
34. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 FE
150
34. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip6
150
34. Samsung Galaxy A56
150
34. Xiaomi 15 Ultra
150
40. Honor Magic V3
149
40. Honor 400
149
40. Samsung Galaxy S23
149
40. Vivo X200 Ultra
149
44. Google Pixel 7 Pro
148
44. Huawei Pocket 2
148
44. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+
148
44. Huawei Mate 60 Pro
148
44. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra
148
44. Xiaomi 15
148
50. Honor 200
147
50. Samsung Galaxy S23+
147
50. Samsung Galaxy A55 5G
147
53. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
146
53. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
146
55. Google Pixel Fold
145
55. Google Pixel 8a
145
55. Samsung Galaxy S24 FE
145
55. Vivo X Fold3 Pro
145
59. Oppo Find X7 Ultra
144
59. Oppo Find N5
144
59. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
144
62. Asus Zenfone 11 Ultra
143
62. Huawei P60 Pro
143
62. OnePlus 13
143
62. Samsung Galaxy A35 5G
143
62. Xiaomi 14T Pro
143
67. Apple iPhone 16
142
67. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
142
67. Oppo Find N2 Flip
142
67. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
142
67. Xiaomi 14T
142
72. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
141
73. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
140
73. Apple iPhone 15
140
73. Honor 90
140
73. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
140
73. Xiaomi 14 Ultra
140
78. Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G
139
79. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
138
79. Apple iPhone 14
138
79. Honor Magic4 Ultimate
138
79. Oppo Find X6 Pro
138
83. OnePlus Open
137
83. Oppo Find X5 Pro
137
83. Vivo X Fold
137
83. Xiaomi 14
137
87. Google Pixel 7
136
87. Honor Magic Vs
136
87. Motorola Edge 50 Neo
136
90. Apple iPhone 13
135
90. Google Pixel 7a
135
90. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
135
90. Vivo X90 Pro+
135
90. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G
135
95. Huawei P50 Pro
134
95. Nothing Phone (2)
134
95. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
134
98. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
133
98. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
133
98. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
133
98. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
133
98. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)
133
103. Asus ROG Phone 7
132
103. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
132
103. Vivo X90 Pro
132
103. Xiaomi Mix Fold 3
132
103. Xiaomi 13
132
108. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
131
108. Sony Xperia 5 IV
131
108. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
131
108. Xiaomi 13 Pro
131
112. Apple iPhone 13 mini
130
112. Google Pixel 6 Pro
130
112. Honor Magic4 Pro
130
112. Oppo Find X5
130
112. Realme GT 2 Pro
130
112. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
130
112. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
130
112. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
130
112. Vivo X70 Pro+
130
112. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
130
112. Xiaomi 12T
130
123. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
129
123. Xiaomi 13T Pro
129
123. Xiaomi 13T
129
126. Oppo Find N2
128
127. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
127
127. Asus ROG Phone 6
127
127. Sony Xperia 5 V
127
127. Xiaomi 12T Pro
127
131. Asus Zenfone 10
126
131. Oppo Find X6
126
131. Sony Xperia 1 IV
126
131. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
126
135. Google Pixel 6a
125
135. Google Pixel 6
125
135. Honor 70
125
135. Oppo Find X3 Pro
125
135. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
125
135. Xiaomi Mi 11
125
135. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
125
142. Apple iPhone 12 Pro
124
142. Motorola Razr 50
124
142. OnePlus 11
124
142. OnePlus 10 Pro
124
142. OnePlus 9 Pro
124
142. Oppo Reno8 5G
124
148. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
123
148. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
123
148. Oppo Find X3 Neo
123
148. Xiaomi 12 Pro
123
152. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
122
152. Motorola Edge 40 Pro
122
152. Nothing Phone(1)
122
155. Apple iPhone 12
121
156. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
120
156. Realme GT 5G
120
158. Fairphone 5
119
158. Xiaomi 12
119
160. Asus Zenfone 8
115
160. Oppo Reno6 5G
115
162. Realme GT Neo 2 5G
114
162. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
114
164. Motorola Razr 40 Ultra
113
164. Oppo Find X5 Lite
113
166. POCO F4 GT
111
167. Crosscall Stellar-X5
109
168. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
108
169. Sony Xperia 10 V
105
170. Sony Xperia 10 IV
104
171. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
103
172. Crosscall Stellar-M6
101
173. Black Shark 5 Pro
100
174. Vivo X80 Lite 5G
99
175. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
82
DISPLAY
Position in Premium Ranking
2nd
1. Samsung Galaxy S25
157
2. Google Pixel 9
156
2. Samsung Galaxy S25 FE
156
4. Samsung Galaxy S24 (Exynos)
154
5. Google Pixel 8
153
6. Apple iPhone 17
151
7. Samsung Galaxy S23
149
8. Samsung Galaxy S24 FE
145
9. Xiaomi 14T Pro
143
10. Apple iPhone 16
142
10. Xiaomi 14T
142
12. Apple iPhone 15
140
13. Apple iPhone 14
138
14. Xiaomi 14
137
15. Apple iPhone 13
135
16. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
133
17. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
132
17. Xiaomi 13
132
19. Apple iPhone 13 mini
130
19. Realme GT 2 Pro
130
19. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
130
22. Xiaomi 13T Pro
129
22. Xiaomi 13T
129
24. Xiaomi 12T Pro
127
25. Asus Zenfone 10
126
25. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
126
27. Xiaomi Mi 11
125
28. OnePlus 11
124
29. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
123
29. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
123
29. Oppo Find X3 Neo
123
32. Apple iPhone 12
121
33. Fairphone 5
119
33. Xiaomi 12
119
35. Asus Zenfone 8
115
36. Black Shark 5 Pro
100

Pros

  • Excellent overall video experience.
  • Colors are pleasant and accurate in natural mode.
  • Touch is fast and accurate.

Cons

  • Brightness is high in lowlight and dark environment.
  • Unwanted touches when using the device with one hand are frequent.

The Samsung Galaxy S25 FE strengthens its display profile with improved color accuracy, better uniformity, and more stable viewing-angle behavior, offering a smoother and more coherent visual experience overall. Although its peak brightness remains behind the flagship tier, the device maintains reliable calibration and consistent performance across most real-world conditions.

In Natural Mode, the Samsung Galaxy S25 FE provides accurate, well-balanced colors with restrained saturation, ensuring faithful rendering for both multimedia and everyday use.

Peak luminance is lower than that of the flagship S25 models in High Brightness Mode, which can slightly hinder readability in strong sunlight. Still, brightness transitions are fluid, and outdoor visibility remains acceptable.

Uniformity and viewing-angle handling show the clearest generational gains: the panel exhibits fewer brightness inconsistencies, and color shifts are better controlled when tilted, delivering a more stable and cohesive image.

Beyond these improvements, the device offers an excellent video experience, pleasant color reproduction in Natural Mode, and fast, accurate touch response. However, brightness tends to be high in low-light environments, and unwanted touches occur frequently during one-handed use.

The Galaxy S25 FE also earns the Eye Comfort Label, providing effective blue-light reduction while maintaining natural and accurate color reproduction, ensuring a viewing experience that is both eye-friendly and visually faithful.

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

151

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE

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.

Average Reflectance (SCI) Samsung Galaxy S25 FE
4.8 %
Low
Good
Bad
High
Samsung Galaxy S25 FE
Google Pixel 10
Honor 400
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 FE
480 Hz
Bad
Good
Bad
Great
Samsung Galaxy S25 FE
Google Pixel 10
Honor 400
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

161

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE

167

Google Pixel 10
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 FE
0.56
Good
Good
Bad
Bad
Samsung Galaxy S25 FE
Google Pixel 10
Honor 400
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

164

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE

167

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
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.

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 %
Few
Good
Bad
Many
Samsung Galaxy S25 FE
Google Pixel 10
Honor 400
HDR Video Frame Drops UHD at 30 fps
0 %
Few
Good
Bad
Many
Samsung Galaxy S25 FE
Google Pixel 10
Honor 400
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

141

Samsung Galaxy S25 FE

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 FE
62 ms
Fast
Good
Bad
Slow
Samsung Galaxy S25 FE
Google Pixel 10
Honor 400
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 FE Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s25-fe-display-test/feed/ 0 Eye Comfort DISPLAY DISPLAY Samsung_Galaxy_S25_FE_readability_uniformity Long range telephoto Zoom China’s Flagship Comparison: Cityscape and Portrait https://www.dxomark.com/long-range-telephoto-zoom-chinas-flagship-comparison-cityscape-and-portrait/ https://www.dxomark.com/long-range-telephoto-zoom-chinas-flagship-comparison-cityscape-and-portrait/#respond Thu, 27 Nov 2025 12:56:51 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=188979&preview=true&preview_id=188979 Our series on the latest Chinese flagship smartphones continues. After our first episode focused on daytime portraits and backlit scenarios, and a second episode where we explored night and low-light capabilities, we now turn our attention to long-range zoom performance to see how these devices hold up when pushed to their limits. Modern smartphones are [...]

The post Long range telephoto Zoom China’s Flagship Comparison: Cityscape and Portrait appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> Our series on the latest Chinese flagship smartphones continues. After our first episode focused on daytime portraits and backlit scenarios, and a second episode where we explored night and low-light capabilities, we now turn our attention to long-range zoom performance to see how these devices hold up when pushed to their limits.

Modern smartphones are increasingly capable of reaching exceptionally long focal lengths thanks to high-resolution sensors, hybrid optical systems, and advanced computational photography. However, as zoom ratios increase, software processing plays an even greater role, influencing how details, fine textures, and overall scene rendering are reproduced.

In this comparison, we examined long range telephoto performance across five top-tier devices: Apple iPhone 17 Pro, Honor Magic 8 Pro, OPPO Find X9 Pro, vivo X300 Pro, and Xiaomi 17 Pro Max. Our intention was to observe how each phone behaves when pushed toward the upper limits of zoom not only on static landscapes, but also on zoomed-in portraits where facial rendering becomes more challenging.

Portrait Performance

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro (8x zoom)
Honor Magic 8 Pro
Honor Magic 8 Pro (10x zoom)
OPPO Find X9 Pro
OPPO Find X9 Pro (6x zoom)
vivo X300 Pro
vivo X300 Pro (10x zoom)
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max (10x zoom)

Portraits under long-range zoom further amplified stylistic differences between devices. The iPhone 17 Pro rendered subjects slightly darker and warmer, producing a natural yet more subdued interpretation. The OPPO Find X9 Pro leaned toward a softer result with moderate detail, while Honor Magic 8 Pro produced bright, crisp faces with subtle signs of motion blur.

The Xiaomi 17 Pro Max delivered clearly defined facial detail, and vivo X300 Pro produced one of the brightest and sharpest portrayals overall. When viewed closely, vivo, Honor, and Xiaomi all displayed slight sharpening behavior that became noticeable on fine details, but in full-frame viewing, each device presented a balanced and visually pleasing portrait representation. These variations reflect each brand’s priority between natural rendering and enhanced clarity when operating at extreme zoom levels.

Cityscape Performance

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro (8x zoom)
Honor Magic 8 Pro
Honor Magic 8 Pro (10x zoom)
OPPO Find X9 Pro
OPPO Find X9 Pro (6x zoom)
vivo X300 Pro
vivo X300 Pro (10x zoom)
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max (10x zoom)

At extremely long zoom distances, all five smartphones captured usable and visually appealing landscape results, yet their processing styles showed clear differentiation. The iPhone 17 Pro delivered a natural overall rendering with a restrained approach to sharpening, while the OPPO Find X9 Pro maintained stable detail even at a slightly lower zoom level, though minor flare reduced contrast in certain situations.

The Honor Magic 8 Pro produced clean images but relied on heavier detail processing, resulting in occasional unnatural nuances when examined closely. Similarly, vivo X300 Pro delivered strong detail and brightness, though its processing introduced more noticeable artifacts in fine textures.

The Xiaomi 17 Pro Max followed a similar path, producing generally pleasant full-frame results, yet slight motion blur reduced clarity and contrast under deep magnification. Despite these variations, all devices performed competently, with differences becoming most apparent during zoom-in evaluation.

Conclusion

All five flagships demonstrated convincing capability at long zoom ranges, confirming how far mobile telephoto systems have evolved. The iPhone prioritizes a restrained and natural style, while OPPO focuses on stability and balance even with a slightly shorter zoom factor. Honor offers sharp and clean results, though sometimes with visible processing at close inspection, whereas vivo pushes clarity and brightness further for a crisp, high-impact rendering. Xiaomi sits closely beside vivo and Honor with a similarly detailed output, though fine-detail softness may appear in movement-heavy scenes.

In the end, each manufacturer approaches high-zoom photography with its own vision from natural rendering to clarity-driven enhancement allowing different user preferences to align with different devices.

The post Long range telephoto Zoom China’s Flagship Comparison: Cityscape and Portrait appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/long-range-telephoto-zoom-chinas-flagship-comparison-cityscape-and-portrait/feed/ 0 zoom_colorgrqph copy@0.5x zoom_detailsgraph copy@0.5x Apple iPhone Air Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-air-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-air-camera-test/#respond Fri, 21 Nov 2025 09:54:19 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=188697&preview=true&preview_id=188697 We put the Apple iPhone Air 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 Apple iPhone Air Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Apple iPhone Air 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 1/1.56″ sensor, 1.0µm pixels, 26mm equivalent f/1.6-aperture lens, dual pixel PDAF, sensor-shift OIS

Scoring

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


Apple iPhone Air
141
camera
134
Photo
Main
166

184

Bokeh
165

175

Ultra-Wide
14

169

Tele
106

169

155
Video
Main
178

186

Ultra-Wide
14

148

Tele
116

140

Use cases & Conditions

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

BEST 169

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 185

Outdoor

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

BEST 180

Indoor

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

BEST 147

Lowlight

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

BEST 159

Zoom

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

Pros

  • Accurate target exposure and wide dynamic range
  • Nice color in most conditions
  • Good balance between texture and noise, especially in bright conditions
  • Good detail and exposure in night shots
  • Very effective image stabilization in video mode results in smooth footage

Cons

  • No tele or ultra-wide camera modules
  • Some underexposure when capturing photos of high-contrast scenes
  • Narrow depth of field can result in out-of-focus background subjects
  • Lack of detail, inaccurate exposure in bokeh mode, slight segmentation errors in difficult scenes
  • Slightly slow focus in photo mode, occasional loss of focus in video mode
  • Exposure instabilities, slight color casts and white balance adaptation issues in video

The Apple iPhone Air did well in the DXOMARK Camera tests, but the lack of dedicated tele and ultra-wide camera modules means it cannot claim a spot among the best in our ranking. In camera terms the iPhone Air is essentially a simplified version of the iPhone 17 Pro, with only one camera module instead of the Pro’s three. Performance is very close to the 17 Pro’s primary camera module, producing bright pictures with very good image quality. However, the lack of tele and ultra-wide modules impacts the Air’s photography experience, especially when compared to some direct competitors, such as the Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge, which include an ultra-wide module for added shooting flexibility.

That being said, the Air’s single camera module captures nice photos in most shooting conditions, with usually pleasant colors and warm white balance. Detail is good and noise levels are low, especially when shooting in daylight. Minor differences to the 17 Pro are noticeable in low light, where the Pro is slightly ahead in terms of detail retention and noise reduction. Like on the Pro, depth of field is slightly limited. As a result background subjects in group shots can be out of focus.

In video mode, the iPhone Air offers a wide range of resolutions and frame rates, up to 60fps at 4K and 240fps at 1080p Full HD. Our testing was performed at 4K/60fps where the device produced the overall best results, with the HDR format delivering a wide dynamic range and vivid colors. The texture/noise trade-off is good in most shooting conditions and the effective image stabilization ensures stable footage. However, our testers noticed occasional exposure instabilities and white balance adaptation issues, as well as some slight refocusing during recording.

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 Air 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

134

Apple iPhone Air

180

Huawei Pura 80 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, image quality and camera performance of the iPhone Air were very close to the iPhone 17 Pro’s primary camera module, with similar strengths and weaknesses. Overall image quality is very good, with pleasant image output in most shooting conditions. Skin tones are rendered very well and nicely exposed, especially when images are viewed on an HDR display, but some occasional underexposure can be noticeable in difficult high-contrast scenes.

Images captured with the iPhone Air camera offer very good detail and a good trade-off between detail and noise, especially when shooting in bright light. In low light scenes noise can become more intrusive and detail levels lag slightly behind the flagship iPhone 17 Pro. The autofocus system does mostly a good job. Pictures are sharp and well focused in most situations, but the focus could be slightly faster to lock on. Depth of field is a little narrow as well, resulting in some out-of-focus background subjects in group shots.

When shooting in portrait mode, the camera produces nice pictures with a natural simulated bokeh effect. However, there can be a lack of detail on subjects and our testers also noticed some imprecise subject segmentation, especially in difficult scenes. The iPhone Air does not come with a dedicated tele zoom camera, so unsurprisingly detail in tele images could be better, especially at medium and long range tele settings. This is also where the difference to the iPhone 17 Pro is most noticeable. At close range tele, the camera produces decent detail which is pretty much on par with the flagship iPhone model.

Main

166

Apple iPhone Air

184

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Apple iPhone Air 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.
Exposure
125

Apple iPhone Air

134

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Color
129

Apple iPhone Air

133

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Exposure and color are the key attributes for technically good pictures. For exposure, 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.
For color, the image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Apple iPhone Air – Accurate target exposure, warm white balance, pleasant color rendering
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Accurate target exposure, warm white balance, pleasant color rendering
Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge – Slight overexposure, neutral white balance, slight skin tone inaccuracies
Sharpness & Timing
116

Apple iPhone Air

135

Huawei Pura 80 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.
Texture
124

Apple iPhone Air

132

Vivo X200 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.
Noise
121

Apple iPhone Air

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.
Artifacts
77

Apple iPhone Air

81

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL
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

Apple iPhone Air

175

Huawei Pura 80 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.

Apple iPhone Air - Bokeh mode
Apple iPhone Air - Slight loss of detail, nice subject segmentation
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Bokeh mode
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Slight loss of detail, nice subject segmentation
Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge - Bokeh mode
Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge - Loss of detail, nice subject segmentation

Tele

106

Apple iPhone Air

169

Huawei Pura 80 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 Air 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.
Apple iPhone Air - Tele zoom
Apple iPhone Air - Loss of detail
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Tele zoom
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Slight loss of detail
Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge - Tele zoom
Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge - Loss of detail

Video

155

Apple iPhone Air

172

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
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

Not only the iPhone Air’s photo quality very close to the 17 Pro’s primary camera. The same is true for the video output. Video clips are bright, with a wide dynamic range, thanks to Apple’s HDR processing and format. Color rendering is generally accurate in most recording conditions, but our testers noticed some slight white balance casts and adaptation issues, as well as some exposure instabilities.

Video footage offers decent trade-off between texture and noise in bright light. Video noise is well under control and detail is good when recording in daylight or under typical indoor lighting. Video autofocus is fast and mostly accurate, but we did notice occasional loss of focus when tracking faces. Video stabilization is very effective, making for stable video, even when running during recording. In addition, motion is very smooth, thanks to a 60fps frame rate. The lack of tele and ultra-wide camera modules also has a negative impact on the video experience, especially when zooming. While at close range tele settings video detail is decent and on a similar level as on the iPhone 17 Pro, there is a noticeable reduction in detail at medium and long range tele.

Main

178

Apple iPhone Air

186

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Apple iPhone Air 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

Apple iPhone Air

127

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Color
121

Apple iPhone Air

131

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
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 visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.
Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Apple iPhone Air – Accurate target exposure, warm white balance, nice colors

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Accurate target exposure, warm white balance, nice colors

Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge – Accurate target exposure, neutral white balance, slightly red skin tones on fair skin
Texture
113

Apple iPhone Air

118

Huawei Pura 80 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.

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 Air

129

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
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.
Stabilization
122

Apple iPhone Air

124

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
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.

Apple iPhone Air – Very effective stabilization

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Very effective stabilization

Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge – Effective stabilization
Artifacts
86

Apple iPhone Air

89

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
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

116

Apple iPhone Air

140

Vivo X200 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.
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.

Apple iPhone Air – Accurate target exposure, slight loss of detail

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Accurate target exposure, slight loss of detail

Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge – Slightly underexposed subject, slight loss of detail

The post Apple iPhone Air Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-air-camera-test/feed/ 0 Sofa_HDR_AppleiPhoneAir_DxOMark_05-00 Sofa_HDR_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark_05-00 Sofa_HDR_SamsungGalaxyS25Edge_DxOMark_05-00 Low-Light & Night Camera Performance : A Closer Look at China’s Latest Flagship https://www.dxomark.com/smartphone-night-shootout-low-light-and-telephoto-comparison/ https://www.dxomark.com/smartphone-night-shootout-low-light-and-telephoto-comparison/#respond Wed, 19 Nov 2025 16:53:17 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=188889&preview=true&preview_id=188889 Our exploration of the newest Chinese flagships continues. Following the first episode, where we examined daytime portraits and challenging backlit shots, we’re now ready to dive into how these devices perform in low-light and nighttime conditions. If you’d like to discover how these flagship devices performed in brighter conditions, you can read the previous article [...]

The post Low-Light & Night Camera Performance : A Closer Look at China’s Latest Flagship appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> Our exploration of the newest Chinese flagships continues. Following the first episode, where we examined daytime portraits and challenging backlit shots, we’re now ready to dive into how these devices perform in low-light and nighttime conditions. If you’d like to discover how these flagship devices performed in brighter conditions, you can read the previous article here.

Building on that foundation, this new installment focuses on night photography, an area where flagship smartphones increasingly differentiate themselves. We compared five major devices: Apple iPhone 17 Pro, HONOR Magic8 Pro, OPPO Find X9 Pro, vivo X300 Pro, and Xiaomi 17 Pro Max.
Our image quality team analyzed each photo to better understand how these models handle both night & low-light main camera shots and telephoto night scenes, two situations that challenge even the most advanced devices.

Low-Light Performance

In this nighttime scenario, the five smartphones demonstrated noticeably different approaches to rendering the scene and presenting the subject.

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Honor Magic8 Pro
Oppo Find X9 Pro
vivo X300 Pro
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

The Xiaomi 17 Pro Max produced a darker overall image while still keeping the subject’s face visibly well-defined. On the opposite end of the spectrum, HONOR Magic8 Pro and the iPhone 17 Pro delivered significantly brighter interpretations, giving the scene a more illuminated appearance.

Among the devices, Apple’s rendering tended to appear slightly cooler compared to the others, while OPPO introduced a warmer interpretation of the subject’s skin. These stylistic choices created subtle but noticeable differences in the overall mood of the images.

In terms of detail, the HONOR Magic8 Pro displayed a somewhat more processed look, giving the scene a style that may appeal to users who prefer a highly refined, digitally enhanced aesthetic. The iPhone 17 Pro showed a bit more visible grain across the frame due to its imaging mode choice, though its overall luminance remained balanced.
It’s worth noting that for this scene, the iPhone automatically switched to a 12MP mode designed for improved night performance rather than the higher resolution it used in other tests.

Low-Light Telephoto Comparison

The telephoto evaluation highlighted the differences in each device’s optical setup:

    • Xiaomi: 115 mm (5×)
    • vivo: 85 mm (3.5×)
    • OPPO: 70 mm (3×)
    • HONOR: 85 mm (3.7×)
    • Apple: 100 mm (4×)
Honor Magic8 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Oppo Find X9 Pro
vivo X300 Pro
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

Each device produced a well-rendered telephoto image, though their visual interpretations varied. HONOR and Xiaomi offered the brightest overall results, while OPPO and vivo delivered a slightly more subdued rendering of the scene.

Color presentation remained pleasant across all models, with Apple leaning slightly warmer and Xiaomi closer to a neutral balance. These differences shaped the atmosphere of each image rather than significantly altering accuracy.

In terms of clarity, vivo and HONOR produced the sharpest and most defined telephoto results in this night scene. OPPO’s output appeared softer in comparison, while Xiaomi introduced a small trace of motion softness, likely due to longer capture processing. The iPhone 17 Pro showed more visible grain, which gave its telephoto image a more textured appearance than the others.

A JOD (Just Observable Difference) is the smallest change in quality that the human eye can detect. On this scale, a gap of 1 JOD means a noticeable improvement therefore the higher JOD values corresponds to better performance in texture / noise.

Conclusion

Each flagship smartphone delivered capable night photography results, yet the differences remain significant enough to influence user preference. Xiaomi and Honor favored brighter interpretations, vivo provided some of the clearest telephoto detail, OPPO leaned toward a softer aesthetic, and Apple maintained its characteristic rendering style with a balance between brightness and softness. These variations reflect the unique imaging philosophies of each manufacturer, allowing users to choose the device that aligns best with their visual preferences and typical nighttime shooting habits.

We will continue to dive into the performance of these newly released flagships by testing these in additional real world scenarios. Stay tuned!

The post Low-Light & Night Camera Performance : A Closer Look at China’s Latest Flagship appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/smartphone-night-shootout-low-light-and-telephoto-comparison/feed/ 0 apple_iphone17pro (195) Honor_Magic8pro (211) Oppo_findx9pro (191) vivo_x300pro (220) xiaomi_17promax (207) lowlight_exposuregraph_article Honor_Magic8pro (272) apple_iphone17pro (251) Oppo_findx9pro (253) vivo_x300pro (281) xiaomi_17promax (264) lowligh_noisetexture copy Dell Pro 14 Premium laptop test https://www.dxomark.com/dell-pro14-premium-laptop-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/dell-pro14-premium-laptop-test/#respond Tue, 18 Nov 2025 13:35:16 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=188814&preview=true&preview_id=188814 We put the Dell Pro 14 Premium through our rigorous DXOMARK Laptop test suite to measure its performance in sound, camera and display. In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Pros Target exposure is often accurate. White balance is often with [...]

The post Dell Pro 14 Premium laptop test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Dell Pro 14 Premium through our rigorous DXOMARK Laptop test suite to measure its performance in sound, camera and display. In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Scoring

Use-case and feature subscores included in the calculations of the global score


Dell Pro14Premium
113
camera
Exposure
68

93

Texture
48

56

Color
71

79

Noise
74

85

Pros

  • Target exposure is often accurate.
  • White balance is often with pleasant color rendering.
  • Details are often well preserved with low level of noise in bright conditions.
  • Subject is often well focused.

Cons

  • Dynamic range can be a bit limited and steps can be visible during exposure variations.
  • Artifacts such as Color Quantization are often visible.
  • Color shading can be visible.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Laptop tests: For scoring and analysis in our laptop reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests and undertake more than 20 hours of perceptual evaluations under controlled lab conditions and real-life scenarios. (For more details about the Laptop protocol, click here.)
The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations in the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

Camera

113

Dell Pro14Premium

136

Apple MacBook Pro 14" (M4, 2024)
i
About DXOMARK Camera Laptop tests

DXOMARK evaluates the image quality of the built in camera during video calls, whether with a single person or with multiple people, in a variety of lighting conditions. Our camera evaluation particularly assesses the ability of the built-in camera to clearly render human faces during video calls. Other intrinsic camera quality aspects are also evaluated, like color reproduction, texture, and noise, as well as artifacts.

Learn more about how we test laptops

The Dell Pro 14 Premium shows overall a good quality in terms of video conference use cases, with an accurate target exposure on face and pleasant color rendering. Subjects are often sharp and focus with a low level of noise in bright conditions. However in more challenging conditions dynamic range can be limited which leads to clipped background (especially in the brights). Some artifacts are often visible, such as color shading and color quantization. Noise can be a bit more visible than its competitors and temporal exposure variations are not always smooth (steps can be visible).

The following chart presents the camera subscores for the video call use case:

Camera scores comparison
Camera texture acutance on Deadleaves with illuminance levels
This graph shows the evolution of texture acutance with the level of lux measured on a Deadleaves chart.
The following graphs show the objective measurements performed in our camera labs:
Camera visual noise evolution with illuminance levels
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.
Target exposure on face with illuminance levels
These measurements take place on a setup combining realistic mannequins and a backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. This graph shows the evolution of lightness measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin with the level of lux, for multiple lighting conditions. The lightness is measured in L*. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions.
Target exposure on face with illuminance levels in HDR conditions
These measurements take place on a setup combining realistic mannequins and a backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. This graph shows the evolution of lightness measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin with the level of lux, for multiple lighting conditions. The lightness is measured in L*. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions.
Target exposure on face with illuminance levels in HDR conditions
These measurements take place on a setup combining realistic mannequins and a backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. This graph shows the evolution of lightness measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin with the level of lux, for multiple lighting conditions. The lightness is measured in L*. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions.

The post Dell Pro 14 Premium laptop test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/dell-pro14-premium-laptop-test/feed/ 0 A Closer Look at China’s Latest Flagships: Portraits and Backlit Camera Performance https://www.dxomark.com/a-closer-look-at-chinas-latest-flagships-portraits-and-backlit-camera-performance/ https://www.dxomark.com/a-closer-look-at-chinas-latest-flagships-portraits-and-backlit-camera-performance/#respond Mon, 17 Nov 2025 14:09:34 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=188755&preview=true&preview_id=188755 Smartphone photography continues to advance rapidly, with manufacturers refining their imaging pipelines to deliver more consistent and visually appealing results. As users increasingly rely on their phones for high-quality photos in everyday situations, the ability to handle both well-lit and challenging lighting conditions has become a key differentiator. To better understand how today’s high-end devices [...]

The post A Closer Look at China’s Latest Flagships: Portraits and Backlit Camera Performance appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> Smartphone photography continues to advance rapidly, with manufacturers refining their imaging pipelines to deliver more consistent and visually appealing results. As users increasingly rely on their phones for high-quality photos in everyday situations, the ability to handle both well-lit and challenging lighting conditions has become a key differentiator. To better understand how today’s high-end devices perform, we tested five flagship smartphones: Xiaomi 17 Pro Max, vivo X300 Pro, HONOR Magic8 Pro, OPPO Find X9 Pro, and Apple iPhone 17 Pro.

In this first episode, we focused on two common scenarios that reveal a device’s photographic strengths and processing decisions: a daytime portrait and a backlit portrait. These scenes were selected because they represent situations encountered by most smartphone users, whether capturing a quick portrait outdoors or photographing a subject with strong light behind them.

Daytime Portrait Performance

Daylight portraits offer a relatively controlled setting, yet they also allow key differences in image processing to emerge. In this scenario, all five devices produced solid results, though each approached subject rendering and scene interpretation in its own way.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max
Honor Magic8 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Oppo Find X9 Pro
vivo X300 Pro

The Xiaomi 17 Pro Max, vivo X300 Pro, and OPPO Find X9 Pro delivered portraits with clear and natural-looking subject representation, maintaining consistent facial rendering and a generally realistic overall appearance. These three devices also remained relatively close in terms of color interpretation, showing only slight variations from one another.

The HONOR Magic8 Pro produced a more processed and stylized look, which may appeal to users who prefer a more enhanced aesthetic. Its rendering also appeared noticeably cooler than the other models, contributing to a less natural impression.

The Apple iPhone 17 Pro offered the warmest interpretation of the scene, with a softer and more subdued representation of the subject compared with the other devices.

Despite these differences, all smartphones handled the daylight portrait scenario effectively, with variations largely reflecting each manufacturer’s preferred interpretation of color, facial detail, and overall portrait style.

Backlit Scene Performance

The backlit test created a more demanding environment, pushing each device to balance the bright background with the subject positioned in front of it. This scenario accentuated the distinctions between the devices far more than the daylight portrait.

vivo X300 Pro
Oppo Find X9 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Honor Magic8 Pro
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

The Xiaomi 17 Pro Max delivered the brightest representation of the subject, making the face more prominent in the frame. In contrast, the iPhone 17 Pro rendered the subject noticeably darker, resulting in a more shadowed appearance.

The vivo X300 Pro and OPPO Find X9 Pro preserved more information in the sky and background areas, offering a better balance between the subject and the environment. Their handling allowed for greater visibility of bright elements behind the subject.

Flare significantly affected both the iPhone 17 Pro and the OPPO Find X9 Pro, reducing overall clarity in the image and softening some details. The Xiaomi 17 Pro Max, VIVO X300 Pro, and HONOR Magic8 Pro maintained stronger subject definition, although the HONOR model continued to exhibit a more processed overall look.
Among the five devices, the OPPO Find X9 Pro showed a noticeable drop in crispness due to flare, while the iPhone 17 Pro delivered the softest backlit result overall.

Conclusion

Across both scenes, the five flagship smartphones demonstrated competent performance, but they also exhibited clearly different rendering styles that reflect each manufacturer’s design choices. Xiaomi, vivo and OPPO tended to deliver brighter and more detailed subject representation, making their results appealing to those who prefer a clear and defined look. HONOR leaned toward a more processed aesthetic that may suit users who enjoy a stylized portrait effect. Apple’s iPhone 17 Pro produced softer and darker results in challenging backlit situations, offering a more subdued interpretation of the scene. These distinctions highlight how each device prioritizes different aspects of image creation, helping users select the smartphone that best aligns with their visual preferences and typical shooting conditions.

We will  continue to dive into the performance of these newly released flagships by testing these in additional real world scenarios. Stay tuned!

The post A Closer Look at China’s Latest Flagships: Portraits and Backlit Camera Performance appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/a-closer-look-at-chinas-latest-flagships-portraits-and-backlit-camera-performance/feed/ 0 xiaomi_17ultra (10) Honor_Magic8pro (10) apple_iphone17pro (12) Oppo_findx8pro (11) vivo_x300pro (10) outdoorportrait_graph_article vivo_x300pro (127) Oppo_findx8pro (112) apple_iphone17pro (110) Honor_Magic8pro (117) xiaomi_17ultra (117) (1) backlit_graph_article