Google Pixel XL added to mobile studio test scene comparison

Like I said earlier but DPReview hasn't really acknowledged. Sample variation exists as much in larger ILC systems as it does in tiny fixed sensor systems!

That said iPhone sensors are smaller than most sensors in Android flagships. Take a look at GSMArena if you want all the specs but its basically an iPhone 1/3" vs Android 1/2.3-2.5" sensors we are talking about. This is why many Android phones have noticably larger humps for the camera module...but one I find absolutely perfect. Despite the hump my Samsung S6 camera module ends up recessed in a very capable case I've dropped billions of times. And the lens module is as pristine as I first got it. Just like top-notch APS-C will out do top-notch MFT sensors, top notch Android sensors will always out-do top-notch iPhone sensors until iPhones adopt that hump, that hump, that lovely lady bump.

Oct 26, 2016*permalink

Also even though there is always sample variation...there is variation in sample variation (as LensRentals beautifully researches and documents). Going off purely anecdotal observations of all smartphone camera tests I've seen so far, iPhone isn't doing too great in this category compared to flagship Android manufacturers.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

Sam Bennett

The Pixel may indeed be sharper, but the default camera apps' HDR+ makes photos look flat and phony, particularly with skin tones. Pretty awful, IMO.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

How can you make this assessment when the availability of such samples are scarce to none? In fact EXIF examination of Google's previously released sample gallery showed processing via VSCO and Snapseed. So how do you have first hand experience of HDR+ combined with Pixel? Or are you just spreading false information based on completely different products/models?

Oct 26, 2016permalink

Sam Bennett

I've been using the Pixel for the last few days, so my assessment is based on my personal experience. I create mobile apps for a living, so I'm lucky enough to get to use these products first hand, including the iPhone 7 Plus, which IMO has much more natural-looking processing. Now, that doesn't mean the Pixel isn't capable of creating excellent results, it's just that the Google Camera app itself needs improvement. The hardware I'm sure is fine. To that point, I've switched to using the "Camera FV-5" app for a while to see if I like the results there more.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

I hate my OOC Samsung jpegs, I always have to fix the WB after the fact. That Raws IMO hit the spot for skin tones. Obviously HDR+ I'm not sure how it is implemented...if the input data is a burst of RAW data, or a burst of OOC jpeg data. HDR+ I believe is *only* for Google hardware though and not other Android devices...in fact strangely Google Camera *stopped* being offered via Google Play marketplace when I used to have it installed on my Samsung. Right now OpenCamera is my app of choice. I would love expansion/collaboration with Hugin and perhaps even RawTherapee for a truly capable end to end RAW + photo stacking app but that is a pipe dream most likely.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

I don't really like the direction Android camera apps are going in which it seems like the hardware manufacturer makes a camera app fit for the hardware device. Now even Google is playing that same game it appears with Google Camera and its features being only available for certain hardware. I think the best alternative would be Open Source collaboration between various existing code bases (i.e. Open Camera, Hugin, Rawtherapee).

Oct 26, 2016*permalink

Sam Bennett

It's tough to argue with though. The truly amazing thing about the iPhone 7 Plus isn't just that it has shallow DoF emulation that works reasonably well (other phones obviously have had it for a while, but not to as good an effect, IMO), but it renders it "live" as you're shooting. Presumably that requires a light of tight integration between the software and hardware, and making that openly available to all developers may be impractical and/or expensive.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

Sean65

Haha. I'm pretty sure you were expecting all these comments.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

Please DPreview change the order that appears the iphone 7 plus picture, the wide angle should be the default and first photo to appear in the comparison, this is causing confusion.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

PLEASE GUYS PAY ATTENTION WHEN COMPARING TO THE IPHONE 7 PLUS, there is a TELE and WIDE the WIDE IS MUCH SHARPER than TELE, Some people are saying that PIXEL XL MUCH SHARPER THAN IPHONE 7 PLUS, it is sharper, but not that much!

Oct 26, 2016*permalink

Priaptor

I own a Iphone 7 + and EVEN in wide, I have to say, the Pixel XL is much sharper. Maybe we see things different but comparing wide, the Pixel XL is the clear winner. Functionally, I can't say, but on this thing, no comparison. Hardly a "but not that much"

Oct 26, 2016permalink

Gal Root

I think the LG G5 is still the best camera around. Of course the S7 and the Pixel are all close but it just offers much much more (longer exposure, higher ISO, ultra wide angle in addition to the normal lens).. G5 is still the way to go (or V20) if you like photography.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

duartix

There is something wrong with these samples.
How can the RAW sample have less detail than the same JPEG?
https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9357741980/download/3539389
There is an horizontal line in the JPEG that is missing from the RAW (top center).
Also the feathers don't quite match (bottom left).

Isn't the JPEG derived from the RAW? Were these takens at different times?

Oct 26, 2016permalink

By default on the Pixel the JPG uses the HDR+ mode (it takes 3 shots and then stacks them with a median blend).

Oct 26, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

No, probably because there is only HDR+ Jpg and not HDR+ Raw.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

By the way: HDR+ does not take 3 images, it's up to 8 according to a Google employee.

Oct 31, 2016permalink

Can somebody tell me what is the native bit depth of these RAW-files? Are there differences between manufacturers, say Huawei and Google?

And yes I know total image quality is a sum of many things, I am just interested in this one particular metric right now. :)

Oct 26, 2016permalink

Both the Pixel and Huawei P9 have 16 Bits Per Sample(RawDigger EXIF information).

Oct 26, 2016permalink

Really, 16-bit native, that's a big surprise! I was hoping for 12-bit. :D Thanks!

Oct 27, 2016*permalink

Can it really be the native bit-depth? It's like medium format territory.

Oct 27, 2016permalink

RawDigger is very reliable to analyse EXIF data, and it says 16 bit.

Oct 27, 2016*permalink

I would love DPR have a look into this. Maybe Rishi et al. could investigate and give us the logic behind the decision to go 16 bit here.

Oct 28, 2016permalink

I had a look at some p9 files (16 bit .psd from LR to PS CC). They held up surprisingly well when pressed for some tonal gradations. There appears to be more bits than 8 but I still think 16 bit is overkill for these. I wonder why they did not choose 12 or 14 instead. Anyhow, I was positively surprised.

Oct 28, 2016permalink

Henrik Melander

Why dont you have the BW sensor on the P9 in this comparison?
Would be interesting to see

Oct 26, 2016permalink

badi

why don't you have sony z5 in this comparison? also Z3, LG G4, G5 ... you need flagships series from all major manufacturers included to make comparisons ... only comparing it with the iphones is not really interesintg

Oct 26, 2016permalink

Sadly there is no RAW capture for the B&W sensor, it's such a shame Huawei hasn't enabled it.

Sony phones don't support raw capture, and their JPG engine is pathetic. They don't want to cannibalize camera sales.

Oct 26, 2016*permalink

nathanbush

Can you put pocketable pro compacts on here? I want to compare the RX100 V with the iPhone 7

Oct 26, 2016permalink

beavertown

Please at least add the pro compacts for comparison too.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

DualSystemGuy

The iPhone 7 is worse than several year old smartphones - the RX100 V comparison isn't going to offer any relevant information. That being said I do like the idea to compare to other P&S.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

beavertown

Jpeg engine does matter. The Raw from the iPhone 7 is awful compare to the XL, but the Jpeg colors (most smartphone users use) from the iPhone just blows the Google into dust. Canon has been doing the same thing for years.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr20_0=google_pixelxl&attr20_1=apple_iphone7&attr21_0=50&attr21_1=1173&attr22_0=daylight&attr22_1=daylight&attr26_0=jpeg&attr26_1=jpeg&attr293_1=wide&normalization=full&widget=423&x=-0.9410480753171957&y=0.5478479356864092

Make sure you checked the wide angle and not tele on the iphone.
I don't know why the tele is the standard on the comparison, kind cheese to see it happening on dpreview. The tele raw is horrible, while the wide is super sharp.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

Leitz

Who needs colors without detail? The iphone camera sucks big time:

Oct 30, 2016permalink

MikeFairbanks

Wait, Google is still planning to sell this phone? I figured they would have quit that program by now.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

FantasticMrFox

Why separate test scenes for larger sensor cameras and phones? As everyone and their grandmother are arguing whether phones are encroaching on the premium camera market, it would be interesting to see whether mobile phone sensors are actually making any gains on larger sensors (APS-C etc.).

Oct 26, 2016permalink

DWinter

I own a Galaxy S7, and even though I think its camera does its job well enough for a phone camera, it still won't come close to my Fuji X-E2 with a fast prime.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

MyReality

There is no need to. Even my 4 year old point-and-shoot Canon Elph 500 HS with the same size sensor will outperform any cellphone camera because of its more versatile 24-100mm lens and its many exposure options. Prints up to 8x12 may look the same.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

@MyReality

A smartphone camera with the same size sensor will dramatically outperform the Canon P&S 4x zoom at wide angle because the fixed focal length lens is ~2 stops brighter. You pay dearly in IQ to get the telephoto reach.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

One can make some decent extrapolations using the Old studio scene which contained many older P&S cameras including the Olympus XZ-1 or XZ-2 (which for a time were cream of the crop P&S cameras). They have since been succeeded by Sony RX100 series. If someone wants cliff notes here they are - Smartphones + RAW are IMO actually *better* than small sensor P&S cameras of old particular since IMO the RAW shot to shot and buffer performance of something like the XZ-1 and overall burst operation was *abysmal* and both have noise at base ISO. The Sony RX100s elevates the performance of premium P&S to be very safely above what any smartphone can reach with 1" sensors. And no your 4 year old Canon P&S is nowhere *near* a Sony RX100. That said the difference between sensors in certain android phones such as the Samsung S6/7, Google Pixel, Huawei P9, etc vs the *smaller* sensor of the iPhones easily makes itself apparent just like there is a difference between MFT and APS-C.

Oct 26, 2016*permalink

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr20_0=google_pixelxl&attr20_1=apple_iphone7&attr21_0=50&attr21_1=1173&attr22_0=daylight&attr22_1=daylight&attr26_0=raw&attr26_1=raw&attr293_1=wide&normalization=full&widget=423&x=-0.9410480753171957&y=0.5478479356864092

I wouldn't even put the Canon ELPH P&S as competitive with some of the previous top P&S's like the Olympus XZ-1. But I think now my Samsung S6 is every bit as good as my XZ-1 ever was except with *faster* operation overall. However the tele performance of the XZ-1 optics (which has been copied and copied over and over) was phenomenal for the time. But I think the Sony RX100 variants have now superseded what the XZ-1 can do by a distant margin.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

MyReality

@Timbukto - I disagree with you. We will most likely never know for sure. But it would be interesting to put any cellphone camera up against the Canon 500 HS at 24mm and 100mm in bright light and low light and using iso 100-800 and make 13x19 prints. Software internal to cellphones try to correct what they can correct and give a very cooked picture. The Canon does not correct anything. Having said that, I think the prints from the Canon will still look better.

Oct 28, 2016*permalink

Carsten Thomsen

Continue from previous post:
6. Apple is slightly hot on the Red and Green Channels, Google is more Cool, and more neutral.
7. When I view the two imagines full screen, to get an overall feel of things, Apple colors are much more punchy. Even when dropping the Exposure by 0.5 EV. This is probably due to the wider color gamut.

My conclusion: If sharpness is the only criteria, Google wins by a small margin. But Apple has a more conservative (abberation free) approach to image processing, and with the wider gamut is gives a more pleasant picture for my taste.

On a recent vacation I shot the 7 Plus exclusively, and time and again I when compared the recorded shot on the screen with the "real world" just captured, I was astounded by the accuracy of color rendering and exposure.

I would suggest the DP Review offers more insight and guidance to the processing going on in high end smart phones, it is a totally new game.

Oct 25, 2016*permalink

s1oth1ovechunk

A small margin? The Google image is worlds sharper....

Oct 25, 2016permalink

The Name is Bond

Small margin?!?! The iphone image is junk even at ISO50. Fine for facebook but that's about it. The pixel looks like a pic from a very decent full sized p&s.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

TrojMacReady

The Apple processing algorithm is a bit dodgy. Here in a studio, colors and WB come out ok, but in outdoor daylight, it adds the famous yellow veil to mimic the golden hours in almost every shot that involves a sky. Add to that a a very low blackpoint for a bit of a washed out look.

Here's an example:
http://i-cdn.phonearena.com/images/articles/259626-image/previews-mosaics-5.jpg

It's how you pick them out in every "blind" comparison on the net.

Oct 26, 2016*permalink

Carsten Thomsen

Observations on OOC jpg files from both cameras:
1. Google is sharper on natural objects such as strands of hair than Apple.
2. Google has significant amounts of chromatic abberation and moire on a large number of test patterens, also on small text.
3. The Apple JPEG seems very appropriately sharpened, additional sharpening starts adding artefacts.
4. Apple has greater dynamic range in the histogram, and Google appears to have a smoother highlight curve, with very little info in the upper 10% of the histogram, while Apple is close to clipping. The Google exposure is about 0.4 EV lower than Apple if I use the midpoint of the greyscale as reference. It is also clear that the tone curves are quite different when examining the Kodak gray scale wedge.
5. Yes, Google has slightly better resolution/sharpness, but it comes at a significant cost of abberations visible by pixel peepers. Apple stays away from pushing the processing too hard, and has fewer artefacts.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Carsten Thomsen

When I first viewed the comparisons, I was looking at the iPhone RAW vs. the Google Pixel. There the difference is dramatic in favour of the Pixel. The RAW developed JPG file, it is much flatter with a restricted dynamic range. It is clear what Apple and Google can do with their multi-exposure software, etc. will give a much better result than developing a RAW file. So ignore the RAW file, this is not a standard DSLR, and the idea that developing a RAW file will give better results may no longer be true.

I have compared the Apple OOC JPG which is about half file size of the Google Pixel JPEG file. I View both at 2:1 in Lightroom on a 5K iMac.

I think many of the very negative comments may be due to using the Apple RAW processed file, I also was shocked when I saw it.

Observations on OOC jpg files from both cameras: See next post.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Leitz

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Kona Mike

I think the JPG versions look better

Oct 25, 2016permalink

arhmatic

What's all this hype about iPhone camera? This is not even close comparison. Not to mention complete lack of any camera settings.

May I compare Apple to Trump? Despite all the negative things you see and hear, you somehow go for this anyway...

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Leitz

Kona Mike, JPG version looks better?? It's horrible on the iphone:

Oct 30, 2016permalink

Is it about time you guys get a heavy hitter like Rishi to do some serious smartphone IQ evaluations just like they are done for ILCs? This includes evaluation of spatial resolution/optics, and evaluation of sensor dynamic range and low light performance. Finally an article about computational photography for which one takes multiple bursts and does a median image stack would be great (because we all know that is exactly the Trump card smartphones hold is in computational photography or photo aggregations done via expertly engineered apps in the future).

Sorry for the nomination for more work Rishi. And I know such a body of work isn't going to be much appreciated by the photo club curmudgeons that make up your viewership!

From my eye however, the optics and RAW quality I see here is potentially surpassing a premium P&S like the Olympus XZ-1 I had of the past. RAW enabled smartphones + computational photography opens up the possibility for smartphones to be *serious* tools IMO.

Oct 25, 2016*permalink

johnsmith404

The amount of detail in the RAW file is really impressive. The jpeg seems to be losing a lot of it though (to its credit, it does increase apparent sharpness though).

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Pixel Peter

The Lumia 1020 blows the Pixel XL out of the water

Oct 25, 2016permalink

photofan1986

Hum. No. Colours are awful and detail is soft. The only advantage is resolution, but that's only in the center of the frame.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

riveredger

Blows out of the water..,an overused expression on this forum

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Frank C.

Double blows out of the water?

Oct 26, 2016permalink

Just "blows".

Oct 26, 2016permalink

Alan2dpreview

What does Low Light mean on the Apple 7? They do not state the ISO. What is it so you can compare?

Oct 25, 2016*permalink

simpleshot

The "i" icon is for "Info" and it shows you a number of things including ISO.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

clicstudio

I am an iPhone fan and love my 7 Plus but this thing just blows the iPhone out of the water... I wish Apple was friends with Google and borrowed the technology for the next iPhone... I am glad the OS is still horrible. This is a great camera on a phone I would never buy. That's why I still own a Canon Powershot 720HS. No phone beats a point and shoot.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

mixem227

Why would you be glad that "the OS is still horrible"??? A competitive Google drives innovation from Apple (and vice versa)...

Oct 25, 2016permalink

raindance

I have both phones, the difference is relatively small in real world use to be honest with you and the iPhone has some amazing tricks up it's sleeve with the dual lenses and bokeh simulation. You also have to consider the app market: there are more high quality photography apps available for iOS such as RNI which are not available in the Google Play store.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

detefon

mixem227, stop trying to reason with Apple fanboys....

Oct 25, 2016*permalink

dcolak

Why can´t I compare them to the rest of real cameras?

Oct 25, 2016permalink

techjedi

Because you already know the outcome.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

PropaPH

gmail, Google Photos, and now this. Google owns me.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

raindance

They do own you. They own the rights to every photo you upload into Google Photos, and that is why there storage is free.

Oct 25, 2016*permalink

I'd say Google owes me.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/

"They own the rights to every photo you upload into Google Photos"

In case anyone was wondering this is of course not true. By uploading the photo you grant Google the right to use it, not own it. Further, "The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. "

Oct 26, 2016permalink

raindance

Richard, nice spin, but having full rights is basically the same thing as owning the content.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

PropaPH

To me this is a ridiculous paranoia about the value of the "content" of your photos, 99.99% of which are of value only to you. Grains of sand in the billions of images available online these days.

Oct 27, 2016permalink

@raindaince

What part of "limited" do you need explained to you?

Oct 28, 2016permalink

Looking at RAW images, Pixel XL is fairly close to Lumia 950XL, has a slight edge in microcontrast but also more moire.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

I think what probably gives the Pixel an edge is the clever software handling of the images. If you use the raw files you miss out on that.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Raw files tells you about the camera quality so it's a good comparison parameter.

Oct 25, 2016*permalink

Arneb

Raw files do tell about the camera's quality... but as I suppose most of us don't develop our own jpgs when shooting with a phone, a good jpg engine (with nice skin colours, ...) is also important.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Kona Mike

look at the pencil drawing of the guy with the beard and tell me what is better jpg or raw? I like the jpg better. was this taken with HDR+ and combining multiple exposures? possibly, but the jpg looks better to me.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

http://i67.tinypic.com/111hue9.png

@Arneb Right - different data points.

@yellowdog Raw files should mean unaffected by software.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

HDR+ can create better results than editing the raw file as HDR+ captures more light through multiple exposures.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

techjedi

The problem comparing raw is that not everyone uses the same raw decoder and may do a poor job of correcting in post. Many users of phone use JPEG and if one phone's JPEG algorithm is better than another, that is essentially part of the camera system and is an important test for the vast majority of phone camera users.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

simpleshot

Close to Lumia 950 XL?

They are not even in the same league, and that is just the camera.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

@Lars V The "quality" of the camera in mobile phones is in most cases irrelevant since software can boost the IQ to a level that is way above what the hardware can produce, for example through HDR+ and clever algorithms.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

@simpleshot DPreview messed up when testing the 950XL - the lower right corner that you showed in your attached image is blurry while the other three corners are not. Possibly the camera was not in plane with the subject, rendering parts of the image out of focus.

Here is the upper left corner - 950XL actually looks sharper than Pixel.
http://i64.tinypic.com/2pt8dur.png

If you look at the other three corners and the center you will see that the pixel has higher microcontrast but does not really resolve more information.

Oct 26, 2016*permalink

@Yellodog I disagree - and I think you will find that so do most photographers here. Software cannot boost quantifiable IQ just preserve it and adjust it. HDR, as you mention, is not an improvement of image quality, but rather an interpretation of an image, or perhaps a combination of images.

A better camera/lens is always a better starting point. This is why it is so important to look at RAW as well as JPEG to understand a camera system.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

@Lars V Of course schemes like HDR can improve IQ. By combining several exposures you can greatly increase the dynamic range and reduce noise, rendering an image better than what can be squeezed from a single raw file.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

@yellodog sure you can stretch the definition of "improve IQ" to combining several images, but the camera is still a limiting factor which means a better camera means better output.

You wrote "The 'quality' of the camera in mobile phones is in most cases irrelevant since software can boost the IQ to a level that is way above what the hardware can produce" - that's just not true: the camera itself is vital for image quality. If you are a photographer you know this.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr20_0=google_pixelxl&attr20_1=apple_iphone7plus&attr21_0=50&attr21_1=1173&attr22_0=daylight&attr22_1=daylight&attr26_0=raw&attr26_1=raw&attr293_1=wide&normalization=full&widget=423&x=-0.5389898052068812&y=0.3047494120844708

@Lars V We're talking about mobile phone cameras of which many use the same sensors and other components. If you imagine you can see a noticeable difference in their raw files then more power to you. I prefer to compare the resulting picture that can be posted online.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

Why are there not more samples that show the iso performance? With 3rd party apps you can shoot in raw and choose the iso... Then we could compare the smartphone sensors with sensors of DSLRs..

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Eric Hensel

You don't need third party apps for those features anymore.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

For the Pixel you need 3rd party apps.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Ramchi

Not sure! I feel that S7 seems to be better as compared with XL though a bit warmer in JPEG. While iPhone 7 Plus seems to be very soft but consistent RAW images (Wide Angle ones)...I think I need to reconsider my decision to buy iPhone 7 Plus based on camera function....

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Eric Calabros

iPhone killer? Are you joking? XL image is full of moire, oversharpening artifacts and horrible chroma noise everywhere. iPhone7 is softer but way cleaner, natural and WB is accurate.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

olahoz

The good news is moire is produced because the lens exceeds the sensor's resolution = good optics

Oct 25, 2016permalink

TrojMacReady

The lens on the iPhone 7 Plus is abysmal in comparison.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

semorg

I saw the the iPhone 7 plus image, and I think it's tester's error on this one or sample variation. I believe iphone7 and 7+ use the same wide angle lens.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Eric Calabros

yea good optics or no AA filter, but I prefer the image at the right:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr20_0=google_pixelxl&attr20_1=apple_iphone7&attr21_0=50&attr21_1=1173&attr22_0=daylight&attr22_1=daylight&attr26_0=raw&attr26_1=raw&attr293_1=wide&normalization=full&widget=423&x=0.14180152890444006&y=-0.9974350831815152

Oct 25, 2016*permalink

DualSystemGuy

The lens in the iPhone is so bad, some of the items in the photo are not even recognizable. I am shocked at how poorly it performs. Beyond a tiny web image I would call that unusable for my personal use anyway.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Bhima78

@Eric
I'm not seeing an issue at all in RAW. Looks fantastic... much better than the iPhone 7.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

imsabbel

@Eric Calabros

Thats personal preference. Although I am sure you can easily emulate your prefered look on the Pixel XL by smearing some vaseline on the lens.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

From the same comparison:
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr20_0=google_pixelxl&attr20_1=apple_iphone7&attr21_0=50&attr21_1=1173&attr22_0=daylight&attr22_1=daylight&attr26_0=raw&attr26_1=raw&attr293_1=wide&normalization=full&widget=423&x=-0.6028950410164042&y=0.25916869040339036

Lol personal preference alright...more like the Ghost of Steve Jobs still has an active RDF field over the weak willed inhabitants of the world. I would pick the Google XL as a wide prime any day and work the RAW as fit.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

wy2lam

@Eric Calabros

Do you still prefer what's on the right?

Oct 25, 2016permalink

TrojMacReady

The iPhone 7 lens looks marginally better than the one on the Plus model, but still miles behind the Pixel.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

zodiacfml

I've never seen discussion of AA filter in a smartphone camera. This is the first time I have seen moire from a smartphone. This is a good sign that the optics is more than good enough and while the resolution is moderate.

It is also not far from the capabilities of the Panasonic CM1 or the Nokia Pureview.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

semorg

comparing to iPhone 7. The "RAW" seems already heavily manipulated by Google. So it's hard to compare them. But Google's seem to have more noise and more CA.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

evilmagicnut

seriously?

Oct 25, 2016permalink

DualSystemGuy

You can download the iPhone 7 / 7 Plus full JPEGs, they look 95% like the RAW. So soft they appear barely usable for anything other than facebook or instagram. Scroll up to the upper left paint brush, it's just a blob. On the Pixel XL every bristle is clearly visible even in the corners of the frame.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

I talked to the Ghost of Steve Jobs. He told me every photo you take with the Google XL invades your privacy by Googling the image you *should* have taken and downloading and presenting that as your photo. So Google is doing image recognition, recognizes the DPReview studio scene, downloads the 100MP Phase One Medium format results, downsamples it to 12MP, sprinkles some noise on top to trick you into thinking its a smartphone image, and voila. Do no evil my butt! I'd rather throw money towards iCloud which of course is my own *private* cloud...that's why the pricing is so much worse. Give me smeary optics that I know I've taken and not these Google manipulations!

Oct 25, 2016permalink

photo_rb

I agree with the OP. Look in the corners especially and you will see more noise and CA on the Google image. Also there looks like a lot of room to sharpen the iPhone 7s to at least match the Google phone.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Yep raw Pixel image looks sharpened, way too much color moire artefacts.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

evilmagicnut

Excellent data! Now the last thing I need to know is how do stills hold up at slow shutter speeds? My s7 can drop to 1/7s and still get sharp (for a phone) results. How would the Pixel do in comparable use case?

I expect the Pixel would shoot 8 exposures at faster shutter speed and merge? I wonder if they're doing digital correction of shake with high speed sampling of the gyro data.

Oct 25, 2016*permalink

(unknown member)

As far as I cn tell the iPhone 7 plus file is messed up. It looks upscaled to match the Pixel. Plus there's no jpeg option, and no iso info. Thatsaid, the Pixel lens looks good.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

knappe duivel

True, the iphone 7+ studio scene pics are messed up. They have been for four weeks now, I am suprised it is not corrected.

Oct 25, 2016*permalink

(unknown member)

There is iso info. Moreover the iphone 7 raw looks nearly like the 7 plus wide raw

Oct 25, 2016*permalink

reptile9985

Nope, it's just bad. No surprise for a 26$ camera module.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

DPreview staff:

Why haven't you fixed the iphone studio test scene yet? There have been a couple of instances in the last little while, ie,

- where the A6300 first images were so bad and getting a lot of flack that within days you had new ones uploaded
- in a studio test scene using the 55/1.8 lens it was obviously decentered (a Sony feature!) that someone at DPReview stated they were going to get another sample of the lens and retest

I have not seen this retesting/reshooting done with any other brands. There is obviously something wrong with the iPhone images in this studio comparison that begs for reshooting

THIS is why people have stated you are favouring Sony.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

rfsIII

Pretty great, I wonder how much of the goodness is due to the engineers they acquired when they bought the Nik software company versus the underlying hardware.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Robert

Is it intentional that I can not compare phones to cameras? I really like to see the difference with DSLRs!

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Biowizard

Absolutely! I want to see Phone vs Compact vs 4/3rds, all on the same web page ...

Brian

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Bhima78

Right? I'd like to see how these phones compete with an oldie but a goodie like the original Canon 5D.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

KrisAK

Any reason the settings panel for the iPhone 7 images doesn't have an ISO dropdown (or what I'm assuming is ISO)?

Oct 25, 2016*permalink

reptile9985

Apple dont let you choose ISO

Oct 25, 2016permalink

KrisAK

(Doing my best Picard-facepalm.)

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Mister Roboto

iPhone 7/7+ is horrendously pathetic compared to Pixel so I am still shakin my head how the hell it gotten 86 in DxOMark. Even Galaxy S4 is infinitely better in comparison.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

richardplondon

You DID remember to switch over to 'Daylight Simulation' for the iPhone... and go to Wide to see the native resolution...

Just checking (grin). The initial default is low-light with one, bright light for the other for some reason.

Iphone's not so great towards the edges, but not THAT bad overall.

Oct 25, 2016*permalink

0MitchAG

Yes, I did check Daylight Simulation for both. There's really no need to sugar coat the facts. I even checked the Non-Plus as it shows a JPEG output to compare. The iPhone is not as sharp (actually Pixel looks a bit oversharpened at points) and certainly has less contrast, but detail is really quite smeared even on the drawings near the centre and the corners a bit hazy. If a camera has a wide angle lens, then wouldn't you expect it to be sharp corner to corner unlike a telephoto for portraits? Cmon, it's not like it's an ultrawide by any stretch!

'Overall', it simply doesn't reach the same level as its main competition. It would be understandable if the differences were minor but if you draw the line there, then the competition is exceptional while the iPhone is average. Not good for its reputation and marketing.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

melgross

I don't know. The reviews at arstechnica and Anandtech have the conclusion that the iPhone 7/7+ Still cameras and video is noticeably better than any Android versions.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

0MitchAG

I'm not sure if the latest Android phones have any lag or delay with the camera shutter and processing like they used to. iPhone has always been ahead in that regard.

Oct 26, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

How can I compare them in low light and Raw? The raw file of the Pixel has Iso 1173 f/2 and 1/30s, the iphone has Iso 250 f/1.8 and 1/15s, so a totally different exposure. And smartphone cameras are NOT Iso invariant.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Banhmi

Wow, these comparisons had ought to be pretty embarrassing for Apple. Google + Samsung phone-cameras are playing in a completely different league!

Reminds me of the shock I received the 1st time I came on DPR to compare my point-and-shoot's image results to that of a DSLR.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

rfsIII

Yeah, some of those point and shoots can really resolve...

Oct 25, 2016permalink

Ramchi

I just can't believe I was faithfully believing that iPhone 7 plus cameras are great!!! Not any more!

Oct 25, 2016permalink

arhmatic

iPhone are not only average as cameras, but also completely lacking any camera setting options.

Oct 25, 2016permalink

PhotoUniverse

@arhmatic
You do realize that you don't really have to use the builtin App. right?
You can use Adobe Lightroom for example (free).

Oct 26, 2016*permalink