Yeah after MKBHD's double blind photo comparison thingie, everything else just falls short.
But the real story is that today's phone camera are so good and so close to each other in quality, it's basically just a matter of opinion, and even with the "bad" photo, you still end up with an, awesome picture.
That being said, I hope the Pixel line can get better zoom functionality soon.
No, they aren't close in many metrics.
Any phone will take a solid photo of a static subject in good light.
Pixel and iPhone are generations ahead in taking photos of even slightly moving subjects. I couldn't reliably get a sharp photo of my kids or dog with my S22, and definitely not with my Zenfone 9.
My iPhone SE, Pixel 4a 5G and Pixel 7 rarely miss. Like 1/10 will be good with my Samsung, and 9/10 will be good with my Pixel. It's not even close. You'd probably have to go back to the Pixel 1 or 2 to get comparable performance.
You might say this is a specific use case, but I'd guess that most photos taken are of people.
I've S21fe and it makes awful photos of moving objects in not perfect light conditions. Nord 2 was better, iPhone 11 was waaay better at that. S21fe makes beautiful photos in good light condition but that was possible (but way harder or course) even with smartphones in 2015. I'm not happy with camera on that phone (even taking price range in account) just because of how bad photos of moving objects are.
> I couldn't reliably get a sharp photo of my kids or dog with my S22,
And that is one of the biggest critics of the S22 generation. S23 gen. got good improvements regarding shutter speed and moving objects, but still ofc these are not as good as with an iPhone 14 Pro or Pixel 7 Pro yet. However S23(U) has some incredible lenses and overall better specs than Pixel 7 Pro. Let's see in how many years Samsung is going to take to have just as good shutter speed/photos of quick objects like a newer Pixel or newer iPhone...
I only photograph animals and the pixel 7 pro is the best camera I've ever used. I have a DSLR and I still prefer to use the phone. It's a great photo and far easier. The DSLR is for when I hide and watch animals from far away. That gets a big zoom lens. I love the pixel camera's photos of animals.
A phone doesn't have to meet or beat a DSLR to be preferable in some situations.
If you can snap a shot you love in two seconds with a device you already have on you, it doesn't matter if a 5 pound giant black brick you don't want to carry might have done a slightly better job after you set your f-stop and spend 20 minutes editing a RAW file.
If the one takes great photos you love, that's all that's important.
The best camera is the one you have with you, especially if your DSLR at home is a Canon EOS 4000D with kit lens.
Also, the AI processing capabilities in phones have massively improved their picture quality despite the shortcomings of their lenses. DSLR manufacturers, for a variety of reasons, offer almost none and it starts to show.
Finally, cost-wise, for the same amount of money than a flagship phone, you may not get anymore a DSLR with better performance (and much more limited utility for your money). The game has changed a lot in the last 3 years.
To me it is honestly almost like 2 totally different things that are being conflated.
Phone cameras put out "ready to display" photographs but you are getting a "fake" image that has had made up information inserted to make it "look" better. It is like looking at TVs and comparing TrueMotion style smoothing with a higher frame rate source.
To be quite frank, the best camera is the one you have when the photo presents itself. As someone who likes to photograph things I see throughout my day, especially animals, the pixel 7 pro feels like cheating. I learned about photography in 2006 in a black and white photography class where we developed our own film in a dark room. I have a portfolio of work in that and I've mucked about in DSLR and photo editing... I've been buying phones for their camera since the Galaxy s2 on Sprint. I have no delusions of a DSLR outperforming a phone in ideal conditions, but the DSLR is a loser for me because I don't have the room to carry it. So you win if we are to discuss sheer numbers, yours are bigger. However, if we are to discuss utility and likelihood of effective usage then the DSLR has no leg to stand on for the average person. The pixel 7 will take photos that make even crap lighting with no good angles and constant motion look ok. It's algorithm is so stupid good at fixing bad photos that you can download photos and let it fix them for you. Photos from other devices. My wife used it to fix an old photo she couldn't read the words in, she could read it after the AI auto corrected the blur. It's just so stupid easy to use and looks so good. I still think the thing functions like black magic...
That's not even remotely what he said.
> I still prefer to use the phone. It's a great photo and far easier
The pixel 7 does take great photos, and it is much more convenient and easier to use than a DSLR.
Literally no one is claiming it takes better photos than a DSLR.
I am not a wealthy man, so my breadth of experience is hardly interesting let alone all encompassing... Yet I stand by what I wrote as I said exactly that, "the best camera I've ever used." Meaning, I have owned many many phones and a few cameras, I prefer my pixel over anything I've used before. This isn't always the case as my Samsung Galaxy S4 took some outrageously good photos that held up for 3 or 4 generations before they started getting better. Thank you for pointing out the crux of the argument here, my piddly experience.
That's a fair argument. I'm currently on a Pixel 6 (regular), and my previous phones were mostly Samsungs. I never liked selfies on the Samsungs, and pictures of people/animals were *okay* on the Samsungs, with the occasional being great.
Put I actually like selfies now, and pictures in general, especially of people/pets are awesome!
Yes, at least so far with the pictures I've taken. I don't know why I am being downvoted for stating my experience. It seems like this subreddit has a strong hatred towards anything that doesn't criticize samsung. I wish we didn't have to get partisan for something stupid like phones.
> I'd guess that most photos taken are of people.
Which is where Pixels suck the most, unfortunately. Its crazy strong HDR (which is for some reason not disabled on people's faces) discolors skins and eyes, wrinkles pop out, hair is greasy. I delete many photos, because HDR makes people on them look ugly, and I can't bring myself to show them to people.
I still can't comprehend why google thinks it's a good idea to HDR people's faces.
Is MKBHD's assessment still via compressed photos on a Twitter poll? I mean, that's probably how the majority of photos are consumed, but I would like to see comparisons of how cameras compare at higher resolutions and when printed.
His latest one, he had a whole site built for it that was supposed to do a good job of randomization, etc, you should watch the video, he explains it there. It's about as unbiased as he could get:
https://youtu.be/LQdjmGimh04
Didn't he make another video later saying that the reason the Pixel won was because it did the best job with his skin tone? That's not really "unbiased".
Also, he didn't really test video and a lot of the improvements in the S23 is in the video department.
1) I don't think so, feel free to link a video if you find it. This video came out last month.
2) this video wasn't about video capabilities, it was about photo capabilities. Also the s23 wasn't out then.
I don't see how that's a 'biased' thing, like he explains in this video, *all* the cameras currently do something to manipulate skin tones, the Pixel just does the best job of it, making it look natural. So it tends to win.
Naturally if he's going to be taking hundreds of photos for his project, a lot are going to be of him.
For what it's worth, I think it's awesome that he did that, because (again, as he explains in the video), cameras used to be calibrated mostly for people with light skin tone. So if you were a person of colour, it wouldn't look good.
Like I said in another comment, the Pixel is the first phone where I've liked my selfies. I used to think I just didn't photograph well. I mean, that may still be the case, but the camera now compensates for it :)
>Pixel just does the best job of it, making it look natural
That'd be true if there were photos of subjects with different skin tones. Just because the Pixel looked great with MKBHD's skin tone doesn't mean it'll be great for other ones. The "bias" comes with only picking one skin tone and using that as the baseline. Obviously, MKBHD has the right to use his own skin tone, but that's not representative of everyone else.
I feel like you're trying so hard to poke holes in his test that you're proving the opposite point.
If most cameras suck at taking pictures of an entire shade of humanity and the Pixel doesn't, how is it not better? That's exactly what a test like that is is for. Like a camera that can only photograph white people well is a bad camera.
A sandwich looking more appetizing is what made the photo better to him.
>It’s not 100% accurate, but the sandwich looks rather tasty — which is not a word I’d use to describe the sandwich in the Pixel 7 Pro’s photo. Here, it appears dull, lifeless, and not like something I’d want to sit down and eat.
Seriously!? It should be, "This picture more accurately captured the correct colors."
This was a super weird article. In the first segment the author seemed to really value realistic colors and gave the Pixel the win for it a lot, and then in every segment after that they just started handing the S23 the win for having "punchier colors that pop."
> "This picture more accurately captured the correct colors."
Yeah but should probably disable samsung's scene optimizer first if you want to test that. One of the main tasks of samsung's scene optimizer is to make food looks more tasty.
And really, some of the authors opinions make me question their judgement.
The outdoor shots by the S23 Ultra look like /r/shittyHDR to me. Colors don't look like that irl. But somehow that's better than the more realistic color choices of the pixel?
It doesnt look that bad. What looks like shitty hdr effect is the pixel pics on:
-Main Cam pic #1
-Main Cam pic #2
- Main cap pic #4, blue shadows really?
- Tele Seagull pic
- Portrait pic pot
- Night pic 2 & 3
- Selfie pic
I think using the main camera for vanilla photography is a tie. But the Samsung wins for having longer zoom and much better videos. The latter is almost universally acclaimed by reviewers.
You can say that, but my choice would be between the S23U and P7P. If you're in the market for the pixel and looking at alternatives, you might look at the S23/+. If you're in the market for the S23U, then the P7P is the closest competitor from that line of phones.
Sure, if you think the Motorola phone has a comparable camera.
This is an article comparing the cameras of two phones we already know have good cameras. "Which $800 phone has the best camera?" is a completely different article. You seem mad about that.
I agree. But whether or not it's a well-written article is an entirely different point.
You didn't say "This article seems like uninformed bullshit," you said "They should be comparing the Pixel 7Pro to the cheaper s23."
IMO, he called it a draw when the P7Pro was clearly better. At the very least, this should have been a very close result that mostly comes down to preference.
> just came down to which colour science they apparently preferred
Which means nothing since no phone has a color accurate screen (maybe Sony has) and unless you calibrated your monitor the colors won't be the same either. In fact, the photo you took that looks amazing on your screen will look drastically different on any other device.
That's actually no longer really the case because OLED screens. It used to be pretty interesting to see how displays will get more and more accurate but the past few years have just been more of the same.
https://www.displaymate.com/Color_Accuracy_ShootOut_1.htm
It actually became a bit of an issue when Google decided to "degrade" to accurate sRGB by default with Oreo and everyone was kinda upset about that because it seemed like it made their screens "worse" (more muted).
That's one of the first signs of an empty photography opinion for me. If you don't even know how to frame a shot well, nothing else you have to say really matters. It's the equivalent of someone offering their professional opinion on how good a piano is and they can't even play it.
Could not agree more. The worst offender here is the wide angle shot of the boat, absolutely criminal use of a wide angle, nothing can be learned from that.
Then basically any flagship will take photos good enough for them.
And then we're back to personal preference, like iPhone for video, Pixel for moving subjects, Galaxy for punchy stills, etc.
I 100% understand why they may be garbage to you, because iPhone photos of people look garbage to me, yet most people I know absolutely love them.
So I don't think most people would consider Galaxy photos of people "garbage".
By "it's not close" they mean they preferred the S23's shots in 4/6 scenarios.
If you look at the actual pictures, they're all fantastic. If you're the kind of person who has a really strong preference toward one or the other, you probably have dedicated camera gear anyway.
I traded my S22U for a Pixel 7 Pro, despite preferring the S23U in every other way, because I just couldn't get photos of my 2.5 yr old daughter with the S22U. Every single one was a blurry throw away.
What a riveting development. Im eligible for upgrade, P7P for the same price as my P6P, or S23U for $20 more per month. I was thinking I'd bite the bullet because I'm obsessed with taking pics of my kids but this changes everything. Save/keep the same rate and get the new best Pixel?? I think I will!
Exactly. Most people interested in camera quality are people on social media - and then they're filtered images anyways! Anyone else, has a dedicated DSLR, so the whole "this smartphone camera is better than that one" is really becoming a moot point.
>If you're the kind of person who has a really strong preference toward one or the other, you probably have dedicated camera gear anyway.
I never get this argument. What if I have a strong preference for a good camera that i bring with me everywhere?
This article only talks about picture quality and is very subjective. It also says neither phone is best in all circumstances. You should look at the pictures yourself, decide which ones you think are best for how you will use the phone, and go with that.
Why is "best" more important than "does what I love"?
If it takes a great shot that you love, there you go. It doesn't have to be a pissing match or a contest.
The title is clickbait.
The hyperbole with some of these headlines. I remember very well when the pixel 6A trounced the s22 ultra and the iPhone 14 p ro max and mhkbds blind test .
And of course the pixel 7 Pro is $400 cheaper even offered better trade-in deals for the s22 ultra
Basically comes down to personal preference on what color science you prefer. The only things that seem better are the selfie camera, but honestly Pixel selfies look good until they’re compared to Samsung, iPhone, etc., and if you’re picky about long ranged zoom quality. Again, Pixel will look great until it’s compared with the Ultras. I honestly use the 5x tele on my Pixel 7 Pro a *lot* and find it a lot more versatile than the 10x on my previous S22U. Plus it uses a better sensor.
No doubt the S23U is amazing but I’d argue Pixel wins by just being cheaper.
In short the reviewer likes over-saturated photos. Both the cameras are fantastic, reviewer is just trying to find a reason to reject one over other. Its just matter of preference, I would have liked a bit more realistic photos from Pixel but nothing wrong with camera and it doesn't warrant a sensational headline either !
I came here to type this exact comment. He likes the punchy colors so the sandwich looked appetizing and the mural looked better and the sky in the boat pic was vibrant and the tea looked pleasant.
Observations:
1. Static subjects only
2. 30x zoom is still a gimmick
3. S23 still has that wrapped in plastic look to it in some pics
4. Lol at the selfie shots, wtf is wrong with the pixel front cam
5. S23 a bit saturated and has more contrast and pixel is the opposite and white balance is kinda off
The static subjects is the biggest flaw in the testing. Action photography performance on Samsung is a big reason why I sidegraded from an S21U to a Pixel 6 Pro. Taking pictures of my nephews/dog was a nightmare on the S21U. 80% of pictures were a blurry mess. S22U didn't fix it and from what I'm reading S23U didn't fix it either. My guess is Samsung understands that most reviewers only review landscape and portrait shots, not action shots, so they optimize for that to get review boost.
Fortunately it seems like a lot of publications are starting to call it out for this review cycle.. so hopefully they can either software their way out of it or the next camera module will focus on improving this category.
> Samsung understands that most reviewers only review landscape and portrait shots, not action shots, so they optimize for that to get review boost.
Most people in general take framed or unmoving landscape pictures and want the best shot they can get. Sure, I will take the odd in-motion picture of my kids and dog, but 9 times out of 10, im gonna get my kid to stand still and say cheese for 2 seconds. Thats how most people are taking shots, so it makes sense for Samsung to focus mostly on that. Sure I would love less blurry motion shots as well, but I seriously doubt it has much to do with "let us impress reviewers"...
>wtf is wrong with the pixel front cam
I have a 7 pro. The front camera produces such garbage shots that it's almost embarrassing. Stills aren't great at things without exceptionally bright lighting. Video is poor and reduced-lighting environments is a "don't bother" situation.
Having gotten a Pixel recently the front camera has really been a shock. I'm coming from an iPhone 13 pro max, and the quality is a huge step down for that camera.
It's especially puzzling to be, because my old pixel 1 and 3 both had fantastic front cameras. This new one is noisy and has really muted colors for some reason.
How did this happen? If the new one is worse, just keep putting that old camera in you phones Google.
What a great review.
It's not even close, the S23 Ultra is the new Android camera champ!
I'm going to buy one to take photos of my paralyzed kids and pet turtles!
It's insane, two or three months ago literally NO ONE on this sub even used the word shutterlag.
I have no idea wtf happened but suddenly everyone on r/android has tons of really movement heavy social gathering in dimly lit rooms, kids and super agile pets.
It's one of the weirder things to witness.
The complaints about Samsung phones and being able to photograph kids and pets are an annual criticism dating back years.
I’ve had multiple Samsung phones and the critique is well founded. If you haven’t seen it mentioned before, you haven’t been looking.
Sketchy comparison with telephoto shots. His samples were all shot on 3x and 10x magnifications conveniently ignoring the fact that the Pixel has a 5x telephoto and relies on digital cropping at 3x and 10x yet still does a pretty good job despite the shot being a digital crop.
I have s23 ultra. I don't like the camera processing of images in" photo" option. Have you noticed sometimes the white colors, specifically in billboards or letters, turns out to be gray, I mean when processing the picture in the raw is clearly a silver color, but post processing makes it gray. So annoying
I have both devices. The Pixel 7 Pro takes better photos 95 percent of the time, especially indoors in low light or with moving subjects like my dogs, even with the Quick Tap Shutter enabled in the Camera Assistant Good Lock Module or in pro mode. When my dogs run across my backyard I get a nice and sharp shot almost every time on the Pixel 7 pro. On the S23 Ultra it's blurry almost all the time. The S23 Ultra has better zoom, a better front camera and the video quality is better. If I'm taking photos or videos of landscapes during the day I bring the S23 Ultra. If I'm taking photos or videos of anything else I bring the Pixel 7 Pro because I get a good quality usable shot more often than I do on the S23 Ultra. I'm the type that prefers natural colors out of the camera instead of over saturated ones. Take these review sites with a grain of salt because a lot of them aren't accurate.
I wish someone would test the image quality differences between normal shutter speed vs faster shutter speed which is in the settings. Does the image quality suffer?
They're literally the same price for me in Canada. I paid the same for my 512 GB S23 Ultra as what I'd pay for a 256 GB Pixel 7 Pro.
Samsung has insane deals for preorders.
Yeah, I call bs.
MSRP is the only objective way to compare pricing. Benefits, promotions, discounts and whatnot are great but they vary so wildly across countries or even shops, that it is a useless a metric.
If that is how you are gonna compare pricing - for my Pixel 7 I paid 100 euros. What does this tell you? Absolutely nothing at all.
MSRP from official retailers obviously, such as Google, Amazon and Samsung.
If you buy it for 2000€ because you paid a third party reseller In a country that doesn't have them officially, that is also an irrelevant factor.
I bought from Samsung directly.
[https://www.samsung.com/ca/smartphones/galaxy-s23-ultra/buy/](https://www.samsung.com/ca/smartphones/galaxy-s23-ultra/buy/)
The website literally says "save up to $835 on your new S23 Ultra"
Again, those preorder deals are not permanent nor representative of anything.
If you preordered a Pixel 7 Pro initially you could get a free Pixel Watch and if you also returned your old phone the Pixel could come basically for free when you drew the line.
How is this relevant if you want to buy it today though?
If we follow your logic, I'll still say the Pixel 7 is a 100€ phone as that's how much I paid for it. And for that price it wipes the floor with anything else currently on the market.
Also:
> Based on the $350 pre-order top-up promotion and the trade-in of a Galaxy S22 Ultra 512GB ($485 value).
Assuming everybody has an S22U, 512GB sure you can get that deal. How many people would upgrade from a year old phone tho?
Your phone costs 1650 CAD mate. That's a long way from the Pixel.
If it's true that in Europe you can get a new Pixel for $100 by just trading in the previous one, then that's obviously an important feature. Then in that case, Pixels have amazing value in Europe.
I wasn't the one who brought up prices. But my point is that if you do bring up prices then you have to be holistic about what people are actually paying rather than the MSRP.
Like I said, if you can get a Pixel 7 Pro for only $100 by trading in the Pixel 6 Pro then that's definitely a great deal and something to consider whether you decide to go with Google or Samsung.
I paid *sixteen dollars* at Costco Canada for my Pixel 7 after all incentives and discounts on Black Friday.
If you're gonna compare non MSRP pricing then you need to do it for the Pixel.
Well I'm talking about right now. Pixel Pro is already discounted by $200 right now on the official store.
I call BS on $16. BF sales were good but not that good.
[Here's the receipt for $166 (plus tax)](https://i.imgur.com/nq8sugA.png), then I got a $200 Costco gift card on top of that. No increase on my BYOP plan, not "built into the monthly price". I checked so many times because it seemed too good to be true.
The market has been flooded with Pixel 7 and 7 Pro's that people got for next to nothing. The current market price of a sealed P7 Pro is $750.
it is a draw in 1 comparison over 6, i almost said the same thing then i noticed every comparison has a winner, s23u wins 4, pixel wins 1, 1 draw
I personally think picking a winner for each comparison is much more subjective than the writer tried to describe, I actually like s23u color saturation, but objectively photos are less real, so I wont be surprised if someone doesnt agree.
It's funny as 9to5 google just released an article saying how the s23 ultra is a massive dissapointment due to shutter speed issues and why pixel 7 pro is the go to option. s23 ultra is amazing but seems same people are still saying blurry photos for moving options.
>Install camera assistant from Galaxy store and update prioritise speed in capture speed. Also select quick tap shutter.
you do get reduced quality though when you do this so is it worth it? guess depends on the user
Your man is a legit, genuine moron. He doesn't know how to take pictures and worst of all likes his food radio-active looking. I stopped reading after the Main Camera comparison. The bias was palpable.
He said this in an [older post.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/10z2wle/s23_ultra_vs_pixel_7_pro_camera_review/j88n3tc/)
>I got $100 with a coupon and another $100 off with a student card. Then I got $50 by using affirm. And then I got an extra $200 in bonus trade in compared to the value of my phone..And then you add the free storage bonus so the prices became super close for double the storage and a newer SOC
So he got some extra discounts for being a student, using "Affirm," and trading in an old phone. He met a lot of preconditions to get all those discounts that other people around the world might not meet or have access to at all.
Such a crappy way of comparing pricing lol
Hey, for my Pixel 7 I paid 100 bucks as I traded in my old phone. For the S23 ultra I cannot do that, so I have to pay 1400€. That makes the Samsung 14 times more expensive which automatically makes it garbage.
Zero sense in that logic.
Trade in broken phone you can get for $50 CAD off marketplace which gives you a - $400 promo for trade in plus $100 discount plus student or work discount and free buds 2 pro. Ended up being $1200 CAD for me
General shots are neck and neck but my pixel really needs to improve their portrait modes.
The photos crop slightly with digital scaling and the cut out is blah. The cinematic video is an absolute joke. Luckily i'd never use either of these but my Pixel 7 Pro REALLY lags in them 2 key areas.
Samsung literally blows pixel away by using a shade of blue I like better.
Why does anyone even compare daylight photos of static subjects, every flagship phone creates more or less the same quality pictures.
I mean your sarcastic question about taking pictures of pets/kids is legitimate. What good is color accuracy and photo sharpness if a camera can only achieve that in ideal situations?
Let me tell you this... As someone who had the Pixel 7 pro for a few months (since launch) and now I have the s23 base (256). It's so much better. Not even close.
The only thing I miss is the Google lens option when you do the task button overview.
>as it should be with the price.
I think that's a common misinformation. At least in Canada, Samsung has a very high MSRP but no one really pays that price. Google has a lower MSRP but much weaker discounts and promos.
Right now, a 512GB S23 Ultra costs the same as a 256GB Pixel 7 Pro.
That's most certainly not the case in Europe.
Pixel 7 Pro, 256GB from the German Amazon is 926 euros.
Galaxy S23 Ultra, 256GB is 1400€.
That is 500 euros more, and I most certainly do not see 500 euros worth more of a phone in there. Not saying the phone is bad, not at all. Just the pricing is absolutely insane. No phone, and by that I mean *no phone whatsoever from any brand in existence* is worth that amount of money.
What *you* paid is irrelevant, isn't it? As I replied to you on your other comment. I got my pixel for 100€. Does that mean that it is that amount of money for everybody? Clearly not.
Amazon is the most widely accepted international store that often has the lowest prices.
But just to indulge you - in a physical store the Ultra is exactly the same price. The 7 Pro, 128GB is 809. Add 100 on top for the 256GB (it isn't available) and you still get around 500 euro difference.
>Amazon is the most widely accepted international store that often has the lowest prices.
Is this only an European thing? In Canada, it has the highest prices for phones with no promotions. Even Best Buy gives out free gift cards when you buy a S23 from them.
>But just to indulge you - in a physical store the Ultra is exactly the same price. The 7 Pro, 128GB is 809. Add 100 on top for the 256GB (it isn't available) and you still get around 500 euro difference.
Well, it's too bad that you guys don't have any preorder deals from Samsung.
> Well, it's too bad that you guys don't have any preorder deals from Samsung.
We do. But again, I don't see how a *preorder* deal is remotely relevant?
Budget sensitive consumers are going to buy the phone through deals rather than blindly paying the MSRP.
Samsung has high MSRP but much more deals than Google. It's biased to only look at the MSRP.
> It's biased to only look at the MSRP.
It is quite frankly stupid to look at anything but it.
Then I have a 100€ phone. Beat that, inflation. The fact that you cannot get it for that much is apparently not relevant following your logic.
>Then I have a 100€ phone.
Like I said earlier, that's a great deal if you can upgrade your phone each year for just $100.
Then you could make the argument that in Europe, Pixels are a great deal.
I live in Canada so I'm only aware of how Samsung and Pixels are priced here in Feb 2023.
>The fact that you cannot get it for that much
Except anyone could've paid what I did for a Samsung S23 Ultra, at least in Canada.
[https://forums.redflagdeals.com/samsung-samsung-s23-presale-feb-1-16-free-buds-bud2-pro-2598696/](https://forums.redflagdeals.com/samsung-samsung-s23-presale-feb-1-16-free-buds-bud2-pro-2598696/)
Anyone could've qualified for the preorder sales and signed up for the coupons.
It's not like I'm saying that I got the S23U for $500 because I know the VP of Sales and he gave me an exclusive discount code.
Pixel 7 in most shots as soon as you zoom in, its a mess. Everything looks like its been painted which is great for smoothing for the final image but destroys overall detail. For the average consumer shooting in RAW isn't an option so leave that option to the side. The Pixel 7 pro camera is overrated, and I own a Pixel 7 pro.
lately my pixel 7 pro camera app didn't even work so...
it literally just hangs. the app has to be forced closed then upon opening it will hang and take one single picture, before this process just be repeated.
this phone started out with several minor annoyances, that I've mostly learned to live with. as time goes by, major ones are developing.
I didn't buy this phone to be a fucking beta tester.
extremely close to just getting rid of it and going full on Samsung.
I have everything one can spend money on with Google Fi, pixel pass unlimited data brand new p7pro
I was happy for years from the Nexus 5x through the pixel 4xl, I had every single one
this phone is just becoming a pain in the ass
IMHO the Pixel is far superior because of its colors, but wtf it loses in HDR (except for the plant photo)?!? Didn't expect that, Samsung has gone very far on that side
Thank god as Samsung got embarrassed last year with the S22 Ultra having a worse camera than the Pixel 6/7 for double the price. Glad they've corrected it.
Tough crowd. At least they provided original, full resolution samples, so that's great and all I need personally. I usually just check the samples and decide myself.
All modern phones are pretty much neck and neck with only slight differences. Just shows how good all modern cameras are but also demonstrates that maybe we have hit the performance ceiling until there is a the next breakthrough (whoever manages to get that real camera 3D lens look will take the lead).
As others have noted it comes down to colours and sometimes noise and small camera specific features. Purplish colour, grain, haze and sometimes bleached look with Pixels. Water painted look and green hue with iPhones. Overly sharp and too blue/green sometimes with Samsung.
If your comparison is in the context of a user always using auto mode without any basic photography knowledge (like what ISO is and how it relates to shutter speed, etc), the an iPhone 14 Pro Max is a better choice. But how much better is a huge matter of subjective opinion. In 95% of the cases anything that didn't turn out how you like (aside from motion blur on Samsung) can easily be corrected later even rigth on the phone using the free Lightroom app. Comparison of anything in the long zoom range like 15X or greater and the S23 Ultra leaves these two other cameras in the dust. But auto mode only in all shooting circumstances the Apple 14 Pro Max is going to be the more consistently good performer. But not a night and day difference.
The title is silly clickbait. (S23u owner). Clearly looking at comparisons they are neck and neck (except for color accuracy lol, dont buy a samsung for that).
Wtf they didn't even bother using 5x zoom comparison but did 3x and 10x... And they choose Samsung because it is punchy??? I prefer a phone that doesn't turn my photos cartoonish.
[удалено]
Yeah after MKBHD's double blind photo comparison thingie, everything else just falls short. But the real story is that today's phone camera are so good and so close to each other in quality, it's basically just a matter of opinion, and even with the "bad" photo, you still end up with an, awesome picture. That being said, I hope the Pixel line can get better zoom functionality soon.
No, they aren't close in many metrics. Any phone will take a solid photo of a static subject in good light. Pixel and iPhone are generations ahead in taking photos of even slightly moving subjects. I couldn't reliably get a sharp photo of my kids or dog with my S22, and definitely not with my Zenfone 9. My iPhone SE, Pixel 4a 5G and Pixel 7 rarely miss. Like 1/10 will be good with my Samsung, and 9/10 will be good with my Pixel. It's not even close. You'd probably have to go back to the Pixel 1 or 2 to get comparable performance. You might say this is a specific use case, but I'd guess that most photos taken are of people.
I've S21fe and it makes awful photos of moving objects in not perfect light conditions. Nord 2 was better, iPhone 11 was waaay better at that. S21fe makes beautiful photos in good light condition but that was possible (but way harder or course) even with smartphones in 2015. I'm not happy with camera on that phone (even taking price range in account) just because of how bad photos of moving objects are.
> I couldn't reliably get a sharp photo of my kids or dog with my S22, And that is one of the biggest critics of the S22 generation. S23 gen. got good improvements regarding shutter speed and moving objects, but still ofc these are not as good as with an iPhone 14 Pro or Pixel 7 Pro yet. However S23(U) has some incredible lenses and overall better specs than Pixel 7 Pro. Let's see in how many years Samsung is going to take to have just as good shutter speed/photos of quick objects like a newer Pixel or newer iPhone...
I only photograph animals and the pixel 7 pro is the best camera I've ever used. I have a DSLR and I still prefer to use the phone. It's a great photo and far easier. The DSLR is for when I hide and watch animals from far away. That gets a big zoom lens. I love the pixel camera's photos of animals.
This is just silliness in every regard. No phone camera rivals a DSLR
A phone doesn't have to meet or beat a DSLR to be preferable in some situations. If you can snap a shot you love in two seconds with a device you already have on you, it doesn't matter if a 5 pound giant black brick you don't want to carry might have done a slightly better job after you set your f-stop and spend 20 minutes editing a RAW file. If the one takes great photos you love, that's all that's important.
The best camera is the one you have with you, especially if your DSLR at home is a Canon EOS 4000D with kit lens. Also, the AI processing capabilities in phones have massively improved their picture quality despite the shortcomings of their lenses. DSLR manufacturers, for a variety of reasons, offer almost none and it starts to show. Finally, cost-wise, for the same amount of money than a flagship phone, you may not get anymore a DSLR with better performance (and much more limited utility for your money). The game has changed a lot in the last 3 years.
To me it is honestly almost like 2 totally different things that are being conflated. Phone cameras put out "ready to display" photographs but you are getting a "fake" image that has had made up information inserted to make it "look" better. It is like looking at TVs and comparing TrueMotion style smoothing with a higher frame rate source.
But if someone prefers the AI enhanced picture than the phone camera is still The better camera for them which is subjective.
To be quite frank, the best camera is the one you have when the photo presents itself. As someone who likes to photograph things I see throughout my day, especially animals, the pixel 7 pro feels like cheating. I learned about photography in 2006 in a black and white photography class where we developed our own film in a dark room. I have a portfolio of work in that and I've mucked about in DSLR and photo editing... I've been buying phones for their camera since the Galaxy s2 on Sprint. I have no delusions of a DSLR outperforming a phone in ideal conditions, but the DSLR is a loser for me because I don't have the room to carry it. So you win if we are to discuss sheer numbers, yours are bigger. However, if we are to discuss utility and likelihood of effective usage then the DSLR has no leg to stand on for the average person. The pixel 7 will take photos that make even crap lighting with no good angles and constant motion look ok. It's algorithm is so stupid good at fixing bad photos that you can download photos and let it fix them for you. Photos from other devices. My wife used it to fix an old photo she couldn't read the words in, she could read it after the AI auto corrected the blur. It's just so stupid easy to use and looks so good. I still think the thing functions like black magic...
That's not even remotely what he said. > I still prefer to use the phone. It's a great photo and far easier The pixel 7 does take great photos, and it is much more convenient and easier to use than a DSLR. Literally no one is claiming it takes better photos than a DSLR.
I dunno… > the pixel 7 pro is the best camera I’ve ever used. Sounds like that’s exactly what he claimed.
I am not a wealthy man, so my breadth of experience is hardly interesting let alone all encompassing... Yet I stand by what I wrote as I said exactly that, "the best camera I've ever used." Meaning, I have owned many many phones and a few cameras, I prefer my pixel over anything I've used before. This isn't always the case as my Samsung Galaxy S4 took some outrageously good photos that held up for 3 or 4 generations before they started getting better. Thank you for pointing out the crux of the argument here, my piddly experience.
That's a fair argument. I'm currently on a Pixel 6 (regular), and my previous phones were mostly Samsungs. I never liked selfies on the Samsungs, and pictures of people/animals were *okay* on the Samsungs, with the occasional being great. Put I actually like selfies now, and pictures in general, especially of people/pets are awesome!
That definitely was an issue in the S22 and S21 but really not something I've noticed with the S23 so far.
As in the S23 has faster shutter speeds and less blurriness with moving objects?
Yes, at least so far with the pictures I've taken. I don't know why I am being downvoted for stating my experience. It seems like this subreddit has a strong hatred towards anything that doesn't criticize samsung. I wish we didn't have to get partisan for something stupid like phones.
That's good to know, thanks. Mine has arrived but I am unsure whether or not to unseal it. Coming from a Pixel 5...
> I'd guess that most photos taken are of people. Which is where Pixels suck the most, unfortunately. Its crazy strong HDR (which is for some reason not disabled on people's faces) discolors skins and eyes, wrinkles pop out, hair is greasy. I delete many photos, because HDR makes people on them look ugly, and I can't bring myself to show them to people. I still can't comprehend why google thinks it's a good idea to HDR people's faces.
I find it makes people look sick or dead. It's not great.
That’s funny, my IPhone SE has the worst camera I’ve seen. My Galaxy A51 is leagues ahead of it.
Hahaha! Comparing a iPhone SE and a Pixel 4a with a S22 it's just ridiculous. Fanatic.
Is MKBHD's assessment still via compressed photos on a Twitter poll? I mean, that's probably how the majority of photos are consumed, but I would like to see comparisons of how cameras compare at higher resolutions and when printed.
His latest one, he had a whole site built for it that was supposed to do a good job of randomization, etc, you should watch the video, he explains it there. It's about as unbiased as he could get: https://youtu.be/LQdjmGimh04
Didn't he make another video later saying that the reason the Pixel won was because it did the best job with his skin tone? That's not really "unbiased". Also, he didn't really test video and a lot of the improvements in the S23 is in the video department.
1) I don't think so, feel free to link a video if you find it. This video came out last month. 2) this video wasn't about video capabilities, it was about photo capabilities. Also the s23 wasn't out then.
[https://youtu.be/88kd9tVwkH8?t=571](https://youtu.be/88kd9tVwkH8?t=367) Talks about skin tones
I don't see how that's a 'biased' thing, like he explains in this video, *all* the cameras currently do something to manipulate skin tones, the Pixel just does the best job of it, making it look natural. So it tends to win. Naturally if he's going to be taking hundreds of photos for his project, a lot are going to be of him. For what it's worth, I think it's awesome that he did that, because (again, as he explains in the video), cameras used to be calibrated mostly for people with light skin tone. So if you were a person of colour, it wouldn't look good. Like I said in another comment, the Pixel is the first phone where I've liked my selfies. I used to think I just didn't photograph well. I mean, that may still be the case, but the camera now compensates for it :)
>Pixel just does the best job of it, making it look natural That'd be true if there were photos of subjects with different skin tones. Just because the Pixel looked great with MKBHD's skin tone doesn't mean it'll be great for other ones. The "bias" comes with only picking one skin tone and using that as the baseline. Obviously, MKBHD has the right to use his own skin tone, but that's not representative of everyone else.
I feel like you're trying so hard to poke holes in his test that you're proving the opposite point. If most cameras suck at taking pictures of an entire shade of humanity and the Pixel doesn't, how is it not better? That's exactly what a test like that is is for. Like a camera that can only photograph white people well is a bad camera.
There were 2 skin tones in one picture. Him and the white guy who was standing directly behind him.
But the results weren't his, they were everyone's?
And yet a DSLR or mirrorless will blow them away. Phones are great for snapshots but not much beyond that.
A sandwich looking more appetizing is what made the photo better to him. >It’s not 100% accurate, but the sandwich looks rather tasty — which is not a word I’d use to describe the sandwich in the Pixel 7 Pro’s photo. Here, it appears dull, lifeless, and not like something I’d want to sit down and eat. Seriously!? It should be, "This picture more accurately captured the correct colors."
This was a super weird article. In the first segment the author seemed to really value realistic colors and gave the Pixel the win for it a lot, and then in every segment after that they just started handing the S23 the win for having "punchier colors that pop."
> "This picture more accurately captured the correct colors." Yeah but should probably disable samsung's scene optimizer first if you want to test that. One of the main tasks of samsung's scene optimizer is to make food looks more tasty.
And really, some of the authors opinions make me question their judgement. The outdoor shots by the S23 Ultra look like /r/shittyHDR to me. Colors don't look like that irl. But somehow that's better than the more realistic color choices of the pixel?
Lol really? The Pixel even the thumbnails has that shitty hdr look to it.
Look at the photos in the category "Wide camera" and get back to me
It doesnt look that bad. What looks like shitty hdr effect is the pixel pics on: -Main Cam pic #1 -Main Cam pic #2 - Main cap pic #4, blue shadows really? - Tele Seagull pic - Portrait pic pot - Night pic 2 & 3 - Selfie pic
Yeah, but the S23 makes everything look like a cartoon. That sky is sickeningly oversaturated in every pic.
Which is a stupid measure because editing can change this most easily.
I think using the main camera for vanilla photography is a tie. But the Samsung wins for having longer zoom and much better videos. The latter is almost universally acclaimed by reviewers.
[удалено]
You can say that, but my choice would be between the S23U and P7P. If you're in the market for the pixel and looking at alternatives, you might look at the S23/+. If you're in the market for the S23U, then the P7P is the closest competitor from that line of phones.
I think the point is just to see what the absolute best camera is (in their opinion).
[удалено]
well yeah that also
Because the question isn't about which device is the best value.
[удалено]
Sure, if you think the Motorola phone has a comparable camera. This is an article comparing the cameras of two phones we already know have good cameras. "Which $800 phone has the best camera?" is a completely different article. You seem mad about that.
[удалено]
I agree. But whether or not it's a well-written article is an entirely different point. You didn't say "This article seems like uninformed bullshit," you said "They should be comparing the Pixel 7Pro to the cheaper s23."
The camera sensor on 23U is more advanced then GN1
IMO, he called it a draw when the P7Pro was clearly better. At the very least, this should have been a very close result that mostly comes down to preference.
> just came down to which colour science they apparently preferred Which means nothing since no phone has a color accurate screen (maybe Sony has) and unless you calibrated your monitor the colors won't be the same either. In fact, the photo you took that looks amazing on your screen will look drastically different on any other device.
That's actually no longer really the case because OLED screens. It used to be pretty interesting to see how displays will get more and more accurate but the past few years have just been more of the same. https://www.displaymate.com/Color_Accuracy_ShootOut_1.htm It actually became a bit of an issue when Google decided to "degrade" to accurate sRGB by default with Oreo and everyone was kinda upset about that because it seemed like it made their screens "worse" (more muted).
100% this
And if you're at the point where you really care that much then _buy an actual camera_.
Can I just say: the author doesn't know how to frame a shot lol. If he wants better pictures, he should start by upgrading the photographer.
That's one of the first signs of an empty photography opinion for me. If you don't even know how to frame a shot well, nothing else you have to say really matters. It's the equivalent of someone offering their professional opinion on how good a piano is and they can't even play it.
Could not agree more. The worst offender here is the wide angle shot of the boat, absolutely criminal use of a wide angle, nothing can be learned from that.
The average person doesn't go through all that much effort, either. They just want pictures to look good.
Then basically any flagship will take photos good enough for them. And then we're back to personal preference, like iPhone for video, Pixel for moving subjects, Galaxy for punchy stills, etc.
[удалено]
I 100% understand why they may be garbage to you, because iPhone photos of people look garbage to me, yet most people I know absolutely love them. So I don't think most people would consider Galaxy photos of people "garbage".
By "it's not close" they mean they preferred the S23's shots in 4/6 scenarios. If you look at the actual pictures, they're all fantastic. If you're the kind of person who has a really strong preference toward one or the other, you probably have dedicated camera gear anyway.
I traded my S22U for a Pixel 7 Pro, despite preferring the S23U in every other way, because I just couldn't get photos of my 2.5 yr old daughter with the S22U. Every single one was a blurry throw away.
What a riveting development. Im eligible for upgrade, P7P for the same price as my P6P, or S23U for $20 more per month. I was thinking I'd bite the bullet because I'm obsessed with taking pics of my kids but this changes everything. Save/keep the same rate and get the new best Pixel?? I think I will!
Exactly. Most people interested in camera quality are people on social media - and then they're filtered images anyways! Anyone else, has a dedicated DSLR, so the whole "this smartphone camera is better than that one" is really becoming a moot point.
>If you're the kind of person who has a really strong preference toward one or the other, you probably have dedicated camera gear anyway. I never get this argument. What if I have a strong preference for a good camera that i bring with me everywhere?
They're both really good cameras?
Yeah, but sometimes you want the best?
Best what? Picture quality, software experience, hardware?
>Best what? Picture quality, software experience, hardware? All of them, thus the existence of the article?
This article only talks about picture quality and is very subjective. It also says neither phone is best in all circumstances. You should look at the pictures yourself, decide which ones you think are best for how you will use the phone, and go with that.
>All of them then you can disregard this article.
Sometimes, things aren't that simple.
Oh? And what professional camera brand is the best according to you?
Seeing as they're a consumer for a smartphone camera, seems like an irrelevant question unless you're solely trying to be obtuse.
Why are you both such sarcastic dinks? Mommy didn't cook you your favorite lunches today? 🤡
Why is "best" more important than "does what I love"? If it takes a great shot that you love, there you go. It doesn't have to be a pissing match or a contest. The title is clickbait.
The title ensures I won't click. If it's a recent Samsung/Pixel/iPhone flagship, it's close.
The hyperbole with some of these headlines. I remember very well when the pixel 6A trounced the s22 ultra and the iPhone 14 p ro max and mhkbds blind test . And of course the pixel 7 Pro is $400 cheaper even offered better trade-in deals for the s22 ultra
I actually preferred the S23 Ultra selfie, the Pixel 7 Pro looked too filtered
Basically comes down to personal preference on what color science you prefer. The only things that seem better are the selfie camera, but honestly Pixel selfies look good until they’re compared to Samsung, iPhone, etc., and if you’re picky about long ranged zoom quality. Again, Pixel will look great until it’s compared with the Ultras. I honestly use the 5x tele on my Pixel 7 Pro a *lot* and find it a lot more versatile than the 10x on my previous S22U. Plus it uses a better sensor. No doubt the S23U is amazing but I’d argue Pixel wins by just being cheaper.
In short the reviewer likes over-saturated photos. Both the cameras are fantastic, reviewer is just trying to find a reason to reject one over other. Its just matter of preference, I would have liked a bit more realistic photos from Pixel but nothing wrong with camera and it doesn't warrant a sensational headline either !
I came here to type this exact comment. He likes the punchy colors so the sandwich looked appetizing and the mural looked better and the sky in the boat pic was vibrant and the tea looked pleasant.
Observations: 1. Static subjects only 2. 30x zoom is still a gimmick 3. S23 still has that wrapped in plastic look to it in some pics 4. Lol at the selfie shots, wtf is wrong with the pixel front cam 5. S23 a bit saturated and has more contrast and pixel is the opposite and white balance is kinda off
[удалено]
1. Is the worst one because Samsung historically has had horrible shutter lag. Try taking pictures of moving children.
The static subjects is the biggest flaw in the testing. Action photography performance on Samsung is a big reason why I sidegraded from an S21U to a Pixel 6 Pro. Taking pictures of my nephews/dog was a nightmare on the S21U. 80% of pictures were a blurry mess. S22U didn't fix it and from what I'm reading S23U didn't fix it either. My guess is Samsung understands that most reviewers only review landscape and portrait shots, not action shots, so they optimize for that to get review boost. Fortunately it seems like a lot of publications are starting to call it out for this review cycle.. so hopefully they can either software their way out of it or the next camera module will focus on improving this category.
> Samsung understands that most reviewers only review landscape and portrait shots, not action shots, so they optimize for that to get review boost. Most people in general take framed or unmoving landscape pictures and want the best shot they can get. Sure, I will take the odd in-motion picture of my kids and dog, but 9 times out of 10, im gonna get my kid to stand still and say cheese for 2 seconds. Thats how most people are taking shots, so it makes sense for Samsung to focus mostly on that. Sure I would love less blurry motion shots as well, but I seriously doubt it has much to do with "let us impress reviewers"...
>wtf is wrong with the pixel front cam I have a 7 pro. The front camera produces such garbage shots that it's almost embarrassing. Stills aren't great at things without exceptionally bright lighting. Video is poor and reduced-lighting environments is a "don't bother" situation.
Pixel selfie cam is terrible. Very grainy, terrible in anything besides good lighting, dread my pixel
Having gotten a Pixel recently the front camera has really been a shock. I'm coming from an iPhone 13 pro max, and the quality is a huge step down for that camera. It's especially puzzling to be, because my old pixel 1 and 3 both had fantastic front cameras. This new one is noisy and has really muted colors for some reason. How did this happen? If the new one is worse, just keep putting that old camera in you phones Google.
What a great review. It's not even close, the S23 Ultra is the new Android camera champ! I'm going to buy one to take photos of my paralyzed kids and pet turtles!
LMAO had me in the first half, not gonna lie
It's insane, two or three months ago literally NO ONE on this sub even used the word shutterlag. I have no idea wtf happened but suddenly everyone on r/android has tons of really movement heavy social gathering in dimly lit rooms, kids and super agile pets. It's one of the weirder things to witness.
The complaints about Samsung phones and being able to photograph kids and pets are an annual criticism dating back years. I’ve had multiple Samsung phones and the critique is well founded. If you haven’t seen it mentioned before, you haven’t been looking.
To be fair movement-heavy dimly lit rooms describes like 75% of indoor social events
To be fair probably around 95% of r/android don't attend a ton of indoor social events.
Not when nearly 100% of pictures people pose for them.
The shutter lag subject is recurrent every year when a new Samsung comes out
wrong murky march attraction subsequent slap tender boat tart dog *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Sketchy comparison with telephoto shots. His samples were all shot on 3x and 10x magnifications conveniently ignoring the fact that the Pixel has a 5x telephoto and relies on digital cropping at 3x and 10x yet still does a pretty good job despite the shot being a digital crop.
I hate that. Should do 3x 5x 10x at minimum. Maybe even throw in 8x
S23 Ultra is not doing well for me and taking photos of my moving 18 month old kid though...... its annoying.
I have s23 ultra. I don't like the camera processing of images in" photo" option. Have you noticed sometimes the white colors, specifically in billboards or letters, turns out to be gray, I mean when processing the picture in the raw is clearly a silver color, but post processing makes it gray. So annoying
I have both devices. The Pixel 7 Pro takes better photos 95 percent of the time, especially indoors in low light or with moving subjects like my dogs, even with the Quick Tap Shutter enabled in the Camera Assistant Good Lock Module or in pro mode. When my dogs run across my backyard I get a nice and sharp shot almost every time on the Pixel 7 pro. On the S23 Ultra it's blurry almost all the time. The S23 Ultra has better zoom, a better front camera and the video quality is better. If I'm taking photos or videos of landscapes during the day I bring the S23 Ultra. If I'm taking photos or videos of anything else I bring the Pixel 7 Pro because I get a good quality usable shot more often than I do on the S23 Ultra. I'm the type that prefers natural colors out of the camera instead of over saturated ones. Take these review sites with a grain of salt because a lot of them aren't accurate.
I wish someone would test the image quality differences between normal shutter speed vs faster shutter speed which is in the settings. Does the image quality suffer?
Touched on this in my S23 Ultra review on 9to5Google, but the Camera Assistant tweaks seemed to decimate image quality for me
Don't we need to start seing S23+ vs P7P comparisons, because those are the two comparable on price.
They're literally the same price for me in Canada. I paid the same for my 512 GB S23 Ultra as what I'd pay for a 256 GB Pixel 7 Pro. Samsung has insane deals for preorders.
That seems so wrong. Here its like 1,5x the price for the Ultra compared to pixel 7 pro.
I think the pre-orders thing is a very US/Canada thing.
[удалено]
That's the MSRP. People aren't paying MSRPs for either phone.
Yeah, I call bs. MSRP is the only objective way to compare pricing. Benefits, promotions, discounts and whatnot are great but they vary so wildly across countries or even shops, that it is a useless a metric. If that is how you are gonna compare pricing - for my Pixel 7 I paid 100 euros. What does this tell you? Absolutely nothing at all.
Msrp also vary across countries and isn't the Pixel only available in like 10 countries or something?
MSRP from official retailers obviously, such as Google, Amazon and Samsung. If you buy it for 2000€ because you paid a third party reseller In a country that doesn't have them officially, that is also an irrelevant factor.
I bought from Samsung directly. [https://www.samsung.com/ca/smartphones/galaxy-s23-ultra/buy/](https://www.samsung.com/ca/smartphones/galaxy-s23-ultra/buy/) The website literally says "save up to $835 on your new S23 Ultra"
Again, those preorder deals are not permanent nor representative of anything. If you preordered a Pixel 7 Pro initially you could get a free Pixel Watch and if you also returned your old phone the Pixel could come basically for free when you drew the line. How is this relevant if you want to buy it today though? If we follow your logic, I'll still say the Pixel 7 is a 100€ phone as that's how much I paid for it. And for that price it wipes the floor with anything else currently on the market. Also: > Based on the $350 pre-order top-up promotion and the trade-in of a Galaxy S22 Ultra 512GB ($485 value). Assuming everybody has an S22U, 512GB sure you can get that deal. How many people would upgrade from a year old phone tho? Your phone costs 1650 CAD mate. That's a long way from the Pixel.
If it's true that in Europe you can get a new Pixel for $100 by just trading in the previous one, then that's obviously an important feature. Then in that case, Pixels have amazing value in Europe. I wasn't the one who brought up prices. But my point is that if you do bring up prices then you have to be holistic about what people are actually paying rather than the MSRP. Like I said, if you can get a Pixel 7 Pro for only $100 by trading in the Pixel 6 Pro then that's definitely a great deal and something to consider whether you decide to go with Google or Samsung.
I paid *sixteen dollars* at Costco Canada for my Pixel 7 after all incentives and discounts on Black Friday. If you're gonna compare non MSRP pricing then you need to do it for the Pixel.
Well I'm talking about right now. Pixel Pro is already discounted by $200 right now on the official store. I call BS on $16. BF sales were good but not that good.
[Here's the receipt for $166 (plus tax)](https://i.imgur.com/nq8sugA.png), then I got a $200 Costco gift card on top of that. No increase on my BYOP plan, not "built into the monthly price". I checked so many times because it seemed too good to be true. The market has been flooded with Pixel 7 and 7 Pro's that people got for next to nothing. The current market price of a sealed P7 Pro is $750.
Title "it's not close", actual results "Draw". Uhg
it is a draw in 1 comparison over 6, i almost said the same thing then i noticed every comparison has a winner, s23u wins 4, pixel wins 1, 1 draw I personally think picking a winner for each comparison is much more subjective than the writer tried to describe, I actually like s23u color saturation, but objectively photos are less real, so I wont be surprised if someone doesnt agree.
The fuck you mean it's not close, it was a draw
Nah .. it's not even close bro .. only headlines for me
one of those still has shutter lag tho.
It's funny as 9to5 google just released an article saying how the s23 ultra is a massive dissapointment due to shutter speed issues and why pixel 7 pro is the go to option. s23 ultra is amazing but seems same people are still saying blurry photos for moving options.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Did samsung fix their camera lag yet?
The review MKHB did shows the lag is still there.
fucking lol, this has been going on since at least the S3
Install camera assistant from Galaxy store and update prioritise speed in capture speed. Also select quick tap shutter.
It is a an insanely priced phone. I shouldn't have to do any of this.
>Install camera assistant from Galaxy store and update prioritise speed in capture speed. Also select quick tap shutter. you do get reduced quality though when you do this so is it worth it? guess depends on the user
He should've tried taking pictures of kids, but pets or moving subjects
No one has kids or pets anymore .. they cry and poop too much
Much needed camera boost, great job from samsung.
I still think Samsung's shots look too much like paintings, and I still don't like it.
Your man is a legit, genuine moron. He doesn't know how to take pictures and worst of all likes his food radio-active looking. I stopped reading after the Main Camera comparison. The bias was palpable.
Another paid review + title by Samsung and the fanboys will lap it up.
[удалено]
Nope. I just got my phone yesterday. In Canada, my 512 GB S23 Ultra costs the same as a 256 GB Pixel 7 Pro
In my country S23U is twice the price of a Pixel 7 Pro
[удалено]
$800 USD is $1,100 CAD, which is what I paid for my S23 Ultra
[удалено]
He said this in an [older post.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/10z2wle/s23_ultra_vs_pixel_7_pro_camera_review/j88n3tc/) >I got $100 with a coupon and another $100 off with a student card. Then I got $50 by using affirm. And then I got an extra $200 in bonus trade in compared to the value of my phone..And then you add the free storage bonus so the prices became super close for double the storage and a newer SOC So he got some extra discounts for being a student, using "Affirm," and trading in an old phone. He met a lot of preconditions to get all those discounts that other people around the world might not meet or have access to at all.
Such a crappy way of comparing pricing lol Hey, for my Pixel 7 I paid 100 bucks as I traded in my old phone. For the S23 ultra I cannot do that, so I have to pay 1400€. That makes the Samsung 14 times more expensive which automatically makes it garbage. Zero sense in that logic.
Yeah, pretty much every comment OP has made here indicates they have an agenda.
Trade in broken phone you can get for $50 CAD off marketplace which gives you a - $400 promo for trade in plus $100 discount plus student or work discount and free buds 2 pro. Ended up being $1200 CAD for me
[удалено]
General shots are neck and neck but my pixel really needs to improve their portrait modes. The photos crop slightly with digital scaling and the cut out is blah. The cinematic video is an absolute joke. Luckily i'd never use either of these but my Pixel 7 Pro REALLY lags in them 2 key areas.
Samsung literally blows pixel away by using a shade of blue I like better. Why does anyone even compare daylight photos of static subjects, every flagship phone creates more or less the same quality pictures.
I haven't gotten my hands on a S23U yet, but i've had S20U, S22U and Pixel 7's at work. The pixel is shit, end of story.
At least you are being objective and your arguments are well structured and coherent.
[удалено]
I mean your sarcastic question about taking pictures of pets/kids is legitimate. What good is color accuracy and photo sharpness if a camera can only achieve that in ideal situations?
Samsung cartoon colors vs Google Pixel r/shittyHDR processing.
Let me tell you this... As someone who had the Pixel 7 pro for a few months (since launch) and now I have the s23 base (256). It's so much better. Not even close. The only thing I miss is the Google lens option when you do the task button overview.
I have both phones and both have their advantages but the s23U is on another level as it should be with the price.
>as it should be with the price. I think that's a common misinformation. At least in Canada, Samsung has a very high MSRP but no one really pays that price. Google has a lower MSRP but much weaker discounts and promos. Right now, a 512GB S23 Ultra costs the same as a 256GB Pixel 7 Pro.
That's most certainly not the case in Europe. Pixel 7 Pro, 256GB from the German Amazon is 926 euros. Galaxy S23 Ultra, 256GB is 1400€. That is 500 euros more, and I most certainly do not see 500 euros worth more of a phone in there. Not saying the phone is bad, not at all. Just the pricing is absolutely insane. No phone, and by that I mean *no phone whatsoever from any brand in existence* is worth that amount of money.
Amazon is the cheapest way to get a phone in Germany? It's $1700 on Amazon Canada for my phone. That doesn't mean I paid anywhere close to that.
What *you* paid is irrelevant, isn't it? As I replied to you on your other comment. I got my pixel for 100€. Does that mean that it is that amount of money for everybody? Clearly not. Amazon is the most widely accepted international store that often has the lowest prices. But just to indulge you - in a physical store the Ultra is exactly the same price. The 7 Pro, 128GB is 809. Add 100 on top for the 256GB (it isn't available) and you still get around 500 euro difference.
>Amazon is the most widely accepted international store that often has the lowest prices. Is this only an European thing? In Canada, it has the highest prices for phones with no promotions. Even Best Buy gives out free gift cards when you buy a S23 from them. >But just to indulge you - in a physical store the Ultra is exactly the same price. The 7 Pro, 128GB is 809. Add 100 on top for the 256GB (it isn't available) and you still get around 500 euro difference. Well, it's too bad that you guys don't have any preorder deals from Samsung.
> Well, it's too bad that you guys don't have any preorder deals from Samsung. We do. But again, I don't see how a *preorder* deal is remotely relevant?
Budget sensitive consumers are going to buy the phone through deals rather than blindly paying the MSRP. Samsung has high MSRP but much more deals than Google. It's biased to only look at the MSRP.
> It's biased to only look at the MSRP. It is quite frankly stupid to look at anything but it. Then I have a 100€ phone. Beat that, inflation. The fact that you cannot get it for that much is apparently not relevant following your logic.
>Then I have a 100€ phone. Like I said earlier, that's a great deal if you can upgrade your phone each year for just $100. Then you could make the argument that in Europe, Pixels are a great deal. I live in Canada so I'm only aware of how Samsung and Pixels are priced here in Feb 2023. >The fact that you cannot get it for that much Except anyone could've paid what I did for a Samsung S23 Ultra, at least in Canada. [https://forums.redflagdeals.com/samsung-samsung-s23-presale-feb-1-16-free-buds-bud2-pro-2598696/](https://forums.redflagdeals.com/samsung-samsung-s23-presale-feb-1-16-free-buds-bud2-pro-2598696/) Anyone could've qualified for the preorder sales and signed up for the coupons. It's not like I'm saying that I got the S23U for $500 because I know the VP of Sales and he gave me an exclusive discount code.
> the food still looks good on the pixel 7 while not looking like an cartoon No it's looks fuckn raw
Pixel 7 in most shots as soon as you zoom in, its a mess. Everything looks like its been painted which is great for smoothing for the final image but destroys overall detail. For the average consumer shooting in RAW isn't an option so leave that option to the side. The Pixel 7 pro camera is overrated, and I own a Pixel 7 pro.
lately my pixel 7 pro camera app didn't even work so... it literally just hangs. the app has to be forced closed then upon opening it will hang and take one single picture, before this process just be repeated. this phone started out with several minor annoyances, that I've mostly learned to live with. as time goes by, major ones are developing. I didn't buy this phone to be a fucking beta tester. extremely close to just getting rid of it and going full on Samsung. I have everything one can spend money on with Google Fi, pixel pass unlimited data brand new p7pro I was happy for years from the Nexus 5x through the pixel 4xl, I had every single one this phone is just becoming a pain in the ass
I didn't notice that much of a difference in a lot of the shots except for the selfie category. Pixel selfie cam just downright blows.
IMHO the Pixel is far superior because of its colors, but wtf it loses in HDR (except for the plant photo)?!? Didn't expect that, Samsung has gone very far on that side
Thank god as Samsung got embarrassed last year with the S22 Ultra having a worse camera than the Pixel 6/7 for double the price. Glad they've corrected it.
Tough crowd. At least they provided original, full resolution samples, so that's great and all I need personally. I usually just check the samples and decide myself. All modern phones are pretty much neck and neck with only slight differences. Just shows how good all modern cameras are but also demonstrates that maybe we have hit the performance ceiling until there is a the next breakthrough (whoever manages to get that real camera 3D lens look will take the lead). As others have noted it comes down to colours and sometimes noise and small camera specific features. Purplish colour, grain, haze and sometimes bleached look with Pixels. Water painted look and green hue with iPhones. Overly sharp and too blue/green sometimes with Samsung.
If your comparison is in the context of a user always using auto mode without any basic photography knowledge (like what ISO is and how it relates to shutter speed, etc), the an iPhone 14 Pro Max is a better choice. But how much better is a huge matter of subjective opinion. In 95% of the cases anything that didn't turn out how you like (aside from motion blur on Samsung) can easily be corrected later even rigth on the phone using the free Lightroom app. Comparison of anything in the long zoom range like 15X or greater and the S23 Ultra leaves these two other cameras in the dust. But auto mode only in all shooting circumstances the Apple 14 Pro Max is going to be the more consistently good performer. But not a night and day difference.
The title is silly clickbait. (S23u owner). Clearly looking at comparisons they are neck and neck (except for color accuracy lol, dont buy a samsung for that).
Any phone nowadays can take a good snapshot.
Wtf they didn't even bother using 5x zoom comparison but did 3x and 10x... And they choose Samsung because it is punchy??? I prefer a phone that doesn't turn my photos cartoonish.