S25 a downgrade not and upgrade, camera Performance is worst

[Tictaktoe]

I recently purchased the Samsung Galaxy S25, expecting a true flagship experience, especially in the camera department. However, after using it, I was shocked to find that the camera quality is no better—if not worse—than older mid-range devices like the Galaxy A52s and S20 FE.

Images lacks clarity Low-light photos are grainy

Videos show color shifting and poor stabilization and grainy in low light

Even with minimal zoom, images lose detail and appear blurry.

The A52s actually performs better clear images detailed shots. How can a mid-range device deliver comparable or better results than a flagship?

And when I mentioned same to Samsung in response they said I "cannot compare a mid-range phone to a premium device." If that is the case, then what exactly justifies the higher price of a flagship device?

Premium Pricing Demands Premium Performance

Consumers pay a premium price to experience upgrades in every aspect—performance, display, battery life, and most importantly, camera quality.

If a premium device cannot even outperform a mid-range model like the Galaxy A52s or S20 FE, then why would customers spend more?

Samsung heavily markets the S series as an upgrade in every way—now suddenly, when flaws are exposed, I am being told I “shouldn’t compare”? This is misleading and deceptive.

Why This Is a Huge Concern

Inconsistent Responses from Samsung & Service Centers – Some service centers admit there’s an issue, while others say "no problem found." Now, Samsung is even questioning why service staff acknowledged the flaws in the first place!

Samsung Is Ignoring Clear Evidence & Hiding the Issue

I have provided multiple photos and videos via Samsung Members and email,and also got jobshit regarding same instead of resolving they are bluntly attempting to delay the process and avoid responsibility

Log File Manipulation to Dismiss Complaints

I have now been told that the log file recorded at the time of the job sheet does not show any issues.

This is misleading and deceptive—log files do not always capture real-world performance problems, especially camera quality issues like grainy images, poor stabilization, and color shifting.

The service center staff themselves acknowledged these issues when I visited, yet now Samsung is trying to walk back that admission. Why is Samsung trying to cover this up?

No Official Statement or Fix-

If you’re waiting for Samsung to fix the S25 camera—stop. As i directly asked Samsung Support there response -Samsung has denied any official statement or upcoming updates for this issue.

️ So, for those waiting for a magical software update—wake up! It’s not coming.

This is unethical, deceptive, and a violation of consumer rights. I demand a full refund immediately and insist that my case be escalated to the highest level. If this matter is not resolved promptly, I will be forced to take further action.

If you’re facing similar issues, let’s raise our voices together. Share your experience, demand transparency, and push for real solutions. We deserve better.

#Samsung #SamsungS25 #galaxy S25 #poorcamera

 

[NAwlins Contrarian]

I recently purchased the Samsung Galaxy S25, expecting a true flagship experience,

The S25 is not a flagship phone. I don't follow the details, but AFAIK the S25+, S25 Ultra, and S25 Edge are all above it, and some or all of them likely have better cameras. My current phone is a basic Samsung Galaxy S22, and my phone before that was a basic S7. They are / were fine, perfectly functional for my needs, but not flagships.

especially in the camera department.

Expecting too much from any phone camera is setting yourself up for disappointment. Under the best circumstances, many of them can take quite decent photos. If the circumstances are less favorable, their performances tend to fall off quickly. That's my experience with all of a substantial variety of Android and iOS phones my family and I have had.

However, after using it, I was shocked to find that the camera quality is no better—if not worse—than older mid-range devices like the Galaxy A52s and S20 FE.

Images lacks clarity Low-light photos are grainy

That's pretty much every camera phone. Your expectations seem to have been unreasonable. Your bad assumptions about what you'd get have caused you to be an unhappy consumer.

Videos show color shifting and poor stabilization and grainy in low light

Same.

Even with minimal zoom, images lose detail and appear blurry.

Very few phone cameras actually zoom, instead of crop or something else. Same basic issue.

The A52s actually performs better clear images detailed shots. How can a mid-range device deliver comparable or better results than a flagship?

Maybe a larger sensor and/or larger aperture (smaller number f-stop) on the particular camera on the A52 versus the particular camera on the S25 caused this result.

And when I mentioned same to Samsung in response they said I "cannot compare a mid-range phone to a premium device." If that is the case, then what exactly justifies the higher price of a flagship device?

Premium Pricing Demands Premium Performance

Then go spend your money on a premium camera. The Sony RX100 Va is still available new, for about the price of a good smartphone, it's relatively pocketable, and by and large it can crush every phone in terms of photo quality--at least if the photographer does his job well.

Consumers pay a premium price to experience upgrades in every aspect—performance, display, battery life, and most importantly, camera quality.

That's naive. The upgrades are mostly minimal to incremental. I went from an S7 to an S22, which is the same position in the lineup but seven models newer. The only major upgrade in my experience is far better battery life. Other than that it may be better, but not hugely better, at least for the ways I use a smartphone, including photography. For photography, the S22's autofocus system substantially improves over the S7's, but that's about all.

If a premium device cannot even outperform a mid-range model like the Galaxy A52s or S20 FE, then why would customers spend more?

Maybe you shouldn't have.

[More unreasonable nonsense.]

This was your first post on a brand new account. You've come in and made IMO completely unreasonable complaints about a fairly popular device. There's a pattern that rears its ugly head more than rarely--newbies come in and blame their gear when they should mainly blame themselves for whatever are the problems.

 

[Aizuri]

Consumers pay a premium price to experience upgrades in every aspect—performance, display, battery life, and most importantly, camera quality.

Most importantly. Is that right? It sounds like a highly dubious assumption to me. A phone is a jack-of-all trades. If you wanted a great camera in it, you'd have been well advised to actually check some reviews that dealt with that in detail.

If you didn't do that but expected a camera that happens to specifically meet your expectations anyway, you were being unrealistic. No manufacturer owes you that.

 

[ZilverHaylide]

I recently purchased the Samsung Galaxy S25, expecting a true flagship experience,

The S25 is not a flagship phone. I don't follow the details, but AFAIK the S25+, S25 Ultra, and S25 Edge are all above it, and some or all of them likely have better cameras. My current phone is a basic Samsung Galaxy S22, and my phone before that was a basic S7. They are / were fine, perfectly functional for my needs, but not flagships.

especially in the camera department.

Expecting too much from any phone camera is setting yourself up for disappointment. Under the best circumstances, many of them can take quite decent photos. If the circumstances are less favorable, their performances tend to fall off quickly. That's my experience with all of a substantial variety of Android and iOS phones my family and I have had.

However, after using it, I was shocked to find that the camera quality is no better—if not worse—than older mid-range devices like the Galaxy A52s and S20 FE.

Images lacks clarity Low-light photos are grainy

That's pretty much every camera phone. Your expectations seem to have been unreasonable. Your bad assumptions about what you'd get have caused you to be an unhappy consumer.

Videos show color shifting and poor stabilization and grainy in low light

Same.

Even with minimal zoom, images lose detail and appear blurry.

Very few phone cameras actually zoom, instead of crop or something else. Same basic issue.

The A52s actually performs better clear images detailed shots. How can a mid-range device deliver comparable or better results than a flagship?

Maybe a larger sensor and/or larger aperture (smaller number f-stop) on the particular camera on the A52 versus the particular camera on the S25 caused this result.

And when I mentioned same to Samsung in response they said I "cannot compare a mid-range phone to a premium device." If that is the case, then what exactly justifies the higher price of a flagship device?

Premium Pricing Demands Premium Performance

Then go spend your money on a premium camera. The Sony RX100 Va is still available new, for about the price of a good smartphone, it's relatively pocketable, and by and large it can crush every phone in terms of photo quality--at least if the photographer does his job well.

Consumers pay a premium price to experience upgrades in every aspect—performance, display, battery life, and most importantly, camera quality.

That's naive. The upgrades are mostly minimal to incremental. I went from an S7 to an S22, which is the same position in the lineup but seven models newer. The only major upgrade in my experience is far better battery life. Other than that it may be better, but not hugely better, at least for the ways I use a smartphone, including photography. For photography, the S22's autofocus system substantially improves over the S7's, but that's about all.

If a premium device cannot even outperform a mid-range model like the Galaxy A52s or S20 FE, then why would customers spend more?

Maybe you shouldn't have.

[More unreasonable nonsense.]

This was your first post on a brand new account. You've come in and made IMO completely unreasonable complaints about a fairly popular device.

A product being "fairly popular" has little bearing on the validity of complaints about its quality/performance. McDonalds used to display on its signs the number of billions of its burgers sold. Not sure if they still do, I don't pay any attention to fast-food signs, but it certainly wasn't gourmet dining. Kodak Instamatics were also "fairly popular" in the film era, but no one would mistake the results as coming from an SLR.

If the OP's expectations were unreasonable -- and they probably were -- that may be simply because he believed the advertising claims too much. Fact is, though, that modern advertising is relatively-high in sophisticated manipulation of the consumer, instilling favorable impressions of product performance, and very-low, if not completely devoid of, objective claims, measurements, or comparisons of performance. One might say he got suckered. On the bright side, perhaps going forward he'll be a much more careful consumer, and save many times over what he spent on a phone that disappointed.

There's a pattern that rears its ugly head more than rarely--newbies come in and blame their gear when they should mainly blame themselves for whatever are the problems.

 

[NAwlins Contrarian]

I recently purchased the Samsung Galaxy S25, expecting a true flagship experience,

The S25 is not a flagship phone.... They are / were fine, perfectly functional for my needs, but not flagships.

* * *

Consumers pay a premium price to experience upgrades in every aspect—performance, display, battery life, and most importantly, camera quality.

That's naive. The upgrades are mostly minimal to incremental. I went from an S7 to an S22, which is the same position in the lineup but seven models newer. The only major upgrade in my experience is far better battery life. Other than that it may be better, but not hugely better, at least for the ways I use a smartphone, including photography. For photography, the S22's autofocus system substantially improves over the S7's, but that's about all.

If a premium device cannot even outperform a mid-range model like the Galaxy A52s or S20 FE, then why would customers spend more?

Maybe you shouldn't have.

[More unreasonable nonsense.]

This was your first post on a brand new account. You've come in and made IMO completely unreasonable complaints about a fairly popular device.

A product being "fairly popular" has little bearing on the validity of complaints about its quality/performance. McDonalds used to display on its signs the number of billions of its burgers sold. Not sure if they still do, I don't pay any attention to fast-food signs, but it certainly wasn't gourmet dining. Kodak Instamatics were also "fairly popular" in the film era, but no one would mistake the results as coming from an SLR.

Products usually become popular because they provide at least reasonably good quality and performance relative to the price and the alternatives. McDonald's has sold lots of hamburgers because they've pretty consistently provided a tasty enough burger at a fairly low price. Are there burgers substantially better than a Big Mac? Sure. But they cost at least 50% more.

Instamatic versus SLR presents other issues: substantially differenet costs and complexities. Maybe a more applicable analogy here is smartphone camera versus a dedicated prosumer camera like the RX100 Va I mentioned above.

For many years the Samsung Galaxy S line has been among the world's more popular smartphones. They didn't get there and remain there without providing good quality and performance relative to their prices and the alternative smartphones.

If the OP's expectations were unreasonable -- and they probably were -- that may be simply because he believed the advertising claims too much. Fact is, though, that modern advertising is relatively-high in sophisticated manipulation of the consumer, instilling favorable impressions of product performance, and very-low, if not completely devoid of, objective claims, measurements, or comparisons of performance.

You almost have to have been born yesterday not to take advertising claims that are not very specific with considerable skepticism. And a reasonably-prudent consumer, before spending $800 on a smartphone, is going to comparison-shop: look at independent comparisons and reviews and discuss with others what they have and how they like it. And if you do those things, then you'd probably have much more reasonable expectations.

So the OP's rant strikes me as buyer's remorse for not having carefully considered whether the S25 would meet expectations before spending $800. And I wonder whether any other $800 smartphone would be much better at doing so. I doubt an Apple iPhone 16 or a Google Pixel 9 would have performed much closer to the OP's expectations. In other words, I don't think the S25 is the main problem; the main problem is the OP's lack of due diligence and/or reasonable expectations.

 

[MustAg]

I honestly think buying a Samsung or Apple flagship in 2025 is a huge waste of money.

For one, you can easily take good enough photos with a much cheaper device, say a pixel (the non pro) or a pixel a, or even a used phone from last year. If that's not good enough for you, then buying a dedicated camera would be the right move IMHO, and would make a far more meaningful difference than just buying another phone.

Also Samsung is no longer a company I can stand behind. I've owned a ton of Samsung phones, S7, N9 N10+, S20+, S22 ultra, and now S24 Ultra, and this will be my last Samsung device. Buying a Samsung flagship used to get you everything but the kitchen sink then they started removing features. First the SD card slot, then headphone jack, then the charger and accessories (which they first mocked Apple for doing), and now you don't even get a Bluetooth enabled S pen.. like if you want that then you have to buy it separately... After buying a 1400-1500 USD phone...

There's no worse decision in my eyes than deciding to buy an overpriced 1000+ USD phone, especially if your property is photography.

 

[cutterpup]

The S25 is not a flagship phone. I don't follow the details, but AFAIK the S25+, S25 Ultra, and S25 Edge are all above it, and some or all of them likely have better cameras. My current phone is a basic Samsung Galaxy S22, and my phone before that was a basic S7. They are / were fine, perfectly functional for my needs, but not flagships.

I actually followed the same path. S7 to S22. I still tend to forget my phones even have a camera. That is not the reason I buy them. I have a smart phone for it's multitasking ability, the camera is just a nice plus that comes with the package.

My husband went for a S7 when I did because I found a 2 for 1 sale. He used it only for calls, texts, shopping lists and photos. He just upgraded this year to a Pixel 9 Pro XL. He has expanded to using it occasionally on line. We had been told it had the "best camera". If that is true, it's a plus. But, he only upgraded because the S7 finally died and the pixel was available at a good deal.

 

[NAwlins Contrarian]

The S25 is not a flagship phone. I don't follow the details, but AFAIK the S25+, S25 Ultra, and S25 Edge are all above it, and some or all of them likely have better cameras. My current phone is a basic Samsung Galaxy S22, and my phone before that was a basic S7. They are / were fine, perfectly functional for my needs, but not flagships.

I actually followed the same path. S7 to S22. I still tend to forget my phones even have a camera. That is not the reason I buy them. I have a smart phone for it's multitasking ability, the camera is just a nice plus that comes with the package.

My husband went for a S7 when I did because I found a 2 for 1 sale. He used it only for calls, texts, shopping lists and photos. He just upgraded this year to a Pixel 9 Pro XL. He has expanded to using it occasionally on line. We had been told it had the "best camera". If that is true, it's a plus. But, he only upgraded because the S7 finally died and the pixel was available at a good deal.

It sounds like I'm somewhere in between you and your husband on one side, and the OP on the other. My main reason for carrying a smartphone is communication: calls, emails, and texts. Being able to access the Internet remotely is nice. But I also really like having a camera in my pocket almost any time I'm out of the house. I just have what I think is a realistic set of expectations for what that camera is and is not. The OP's statement:

I recently purchased the Samsung Galaxy S25, expecting a true flagship experience, especially in the camera department,

struck me as difficult to justify on an informed, rational basis. My S22, like my S7 before it, has the option (must be turned on every time) to capture DNG raw files. I can process them with my old Lightroom 6 (but not DxO PhotoLab). For some uses they're fine. For other uses, my phone, and probably any phone, is a wholly inadequate camera.

Somewhat like your husband, I upgraded from the S7 to the S22 because there were indicators that the S7 has having physical issues / becoming less reliable, and also because the S22 was a somewhat smaller size I prefer (unlike some of the intervening models). My S7 was more than five years old when I upgraded. I have no desire to upgrade my S22 any time soon, and see very little benefit to doing so.