Google shares high-resolution Pixel 2 sample photos

The sheer number of comments generated here is a testament that 'phone' photography is in fact a 'thing' and a wonderful 'thing' at that. Recent Phone, ILC, DSLR improvements benefit us all. I'll take one of each please...

It's amazing what a professional photographer can capture on an expensive smartphone with the help of a crew and several damn good looking models. Congrats!

:
"high-resolution" Pixel 2 sample photos = 12MP.. a resolution we have had in digital photography for about 15 years already.. we even had 41MP mobile phones 5 years ago already. Let me go outside to laugh about these 12MP "high-resolution" Pixel 2 sample photos!

The samples look good though.. as they did last year and the year before and the year before that.. and these photos look specially good given the fact that 99.99.99.99% of all of them will looked at on a roughly 5" to 6" VGA sized mobile phone screen on which even 2MP photos will look just as good:)

If you do not think the dynamic range on this thing is exceptional, you are plain wrong.

I'm actually a bit surprised here because on my monitor, these look great considering they are from a Smart Phone. Things are definitely stepping up in that department.

As with current DSLRs, all the new phones have very good cameras. This is not a deciding factor for me.

Today's average joe/jane consumer isn't using a PC anymore with big monitors - they use a Smartphone or Tablet for the majority of their needs (web surfing, email, gaming, shopping). On most phone/tablet screens, the image quality from a phone sensor is going to look quite good and that is all that really matters these days.

Hmm, all shots are at f1.8, yet some shots have pretty impressive shallow depth of field, (The hat for example) others virtually none....so is this camera artificially adding fake Depth of field?

Great quality, as expected.
Looking at the close ups I think the resolution is clearly not there, but what Google software has done to the image is a very good compromise between resolution, NR and still acceptable detail.
My LG G6 looks so poor in comparison- lots of NR and processing smearing in HDR mode, high noise in sky areas in normal mode, oversharpened in any mode. If only the Pixel were available in Austria through normal channels, I'd be willing to pay the hefty price, but a grey import plus a high price puts me off.

Great shots.
I'm still on old mobile tech (2nd hand note 3)
Look forward to when this sort of thing is affordable.

Now I see why fate did not allove me to buy a new Pentax.
I am old & I hate to carry heavy photobag moore & moore.

Nobody on the world likes my photos except - me.

Pixel 2 is exelent solution 4 me & I do not need to rob a bank for it.
:) :) :)

Some of these look quite good, but some are terrible. That last shot of the mountain is so mushy, for example.

Noise seems to be a factor in all the shots. Why not shoot at ISO 25? If base ISO is 50, they're really missing a trick.

The pictures are not bat at all... Definitely not class leading per se... but pretty impressive overall.

Google Pixel 2 is no replacement for a DSLR but these photos are still very very good. It's obvious that many people are suffering from the pixel peeping syndrome. The pics look excellent on my 10" pad and also on my 6" phone. I have printed two of the pics (10 x 15cm) and they look great. I am sure they'll look fine on a larger prints as well. Btw, how often do you print A4 or A3....

I wonder what these pictures should demonstrate.

For 12MP the image quality is really bad. Of course, for a phone the pictures are o.k. but so are those of most other phones. If you care for image quality they are just horrible. Any serious compact camera is leages ahead of this pixel garbage.

The more i see of these photos the more i appreciate my 4 year old Fuji-X20

The textures and noise on the landscape style shots looks pretty terrible. The close-up shots and portraits look incredible. I wonder what the keeper rate on the bokeh effect would be in real life.

These are very impressive. Moreover, I love that Google did this so early after the announcement, where we could truly Pixel, if you will, peep these specimens.

They look worst than with the first Pixel 1 (disappointing), but that's normal cause the second version uses a smaller sensor with 1,4µm vs 1,55µm pixel pitch at the same 12 MP resolution.

All those talks about new Google phone camera , I've almost believed it ... . DSLR users - noting to worry about

Watchman :)
These pictures are embarrassingly good.

Very, very nice! I know some people get agitated when they see this kind of improvement in photo quality from a smartphone. I smile, even if the Pixel 2 is unlikely to be my new smartphone. Well done Google.

The only thing I'd object to with those photos is the over sharpening. It's a bit severe on some shots.

There's no detail in these files, I would like better results than this. My A7Rii + lens are small and only 600g together, so the convenience of a phone doesn't make much difference. These look like the results from cheap compact cameras which we all know have been irrelevant for years.

I wouldn't want to travel with just a phone because the resulting files don't hold up well, which will become a bigger factor as the years go by. Digital photoframes keep getting bigger, better and cheaper, I'd rather not use mushy photos on such a device or in prints!

I mostly use my phone for quick pet photos, eBay listings and document scanning, that's where the convenience really shines for me.

At the resolution that the images are posted any of the decent phone cameras produces those images unless the images are posted for viewing the original file on a computer it is hard to determine whether the images are of good quality.

camera manufacturers better plan to throw everything they got including the kitchen sink into new models, but even then it may just be too late for the general consumer

My take on it:

1- Massive, horrific Digital Sharpening. One of the most things I hate on any camera. Especially on wide detailed LNDS shots.

2- Portrait Mode works so much better than anything I've seen from iphones (7 plus). Almost "looks" like a true 56mm (28mm x2 digital zoom) f/1.2-1.8 FF lens. Didn't see those coming after DxoMark take on it.

3- Dynamic range is just PHENOMENAL. Nothing clips. Massive tonal range WITH a high contrast overall output.

4- A very pleasing colour science, very latest Canon/Nikon like. Not as bad as...., well, lets keep it at that.

A next iteration can easily solve any issues here (just more resolution for 2x portrait mode + better AI bokeh) would be a highly capable 28mm prime + 50mm f/1.2-1.8 primes in your pocket. THIS should reach cameras, wouldn't it be even easier to extend an already isolated f/2 subject to f/1.2 and beyond or so? I'd love that, plus HDR+ burst mode + software.

Most impressive quality. Very pleasing pictures. The slow but steady emerging of acceptable quality from smartphones has certainly made my photography experience richer. Having used cameras since the 70's, I find myself using my dedicated cameras fewer and fewer times. Having the social media to share pictures with my family and friends have also made it more interesting for me with photography. And of course I realize others might have different goals and preferences with their photography where smartphones do not contribute so much to their use cases, but let's just be happy we have more options now for everyone to pursue the flavour of photography. No need for all to reach a consensus on whether smartphones are the best thing since sliced bread or a threat to the artistry of photography.

Why we do have to cheer for the fact that after 10-12 years a smaller sensor has the ability to deliver the same, give or take, of a compact camera of those days..? Is anyone who has even a slight touch with technology that couldn't predict this evolution..?
"Give or take" means that in those days the usual tiny sensors were CCDs delivering ave 5mp, were noisy, offered typical lo res videos, but with more sufficient optics (maybe not actually better but more sufficient) and with more controls. They were cheaper in terms of SRP compared to a today top smartphone the same way that a 3.3 Mp DSLR's price was in the $3K class and today you can buy an entry level DSLR for $500.
Too much ado for nothing more than having the ability to carry a cam in our pockets and not two for the shake of memories or whatever. The same way that your grand parents had to carry a fountain pen or a pencil in their jacket's pocket.

Impressive. Time to sell my rx100.

I feel like you only need two cameras now, Google pixel 2 and Sony rx10 iv

Say goodbye to the DSLR. I did a few years ago.

Smartphones have come a long way. I'll still prefer to use my camera, but it's nice to have a pretty good backup in your pocket for those other times when you don't have a camera with you otherwise.

Dynamic Range is really impressive. :O

DR!