Smart Android And Trik-Commenting on Andorid indeed never endless, because smart devices this one is often updated every certain amount of time. So that the market can always be garapnya menerinya with pleasure. And it is not denied if this device has become the lifestyle of each society. To not wonder if the 6th business information and many are turning to mobail smartphone. With Android which thoroughly dominated the mobile industry, choosing the best Android smartphone is almost identical to choose the best smartphone, period. But while Android phones have few real opponents on other platforms, internal competition is intense.
Introduction
We had a grand camera comparison planned for a while, but it's only now that we finally have all 2020 flagships that it can finally happen. Apple sure took its time with the iPhone 12 Pro Max, but we put a phone in each pocket and went out shooting with that one already released.
The Galaxy Note20 Ultra is Samsung's entry in this contest. Its camera specs are headlined by a 108MP Nonacell primary module with one of the biggest sensors available. A relatively run-of-the-mill fixed focus ultra-wide is the least impressive unit here, while a 5x periscope telephoto makes things a lot more exciting on the long end.
Another 5x periscope tele can be found on the Huawei Mate 40 Pro - no wonder, given that Huawei was among the periscope pioneers. Here it joins a 50MP Quad Bayer main cam and a 16:9 20MP ultrawide with autofocus.
The Xperia 1 II matches the Mate for autofocus on the ultra-wide module; the other two don't. Sony takes its own path with the main cam, opting for a conventional Bayer array on its 12MP sensor, itself not at all a small unit despite the low nominal pixel count. Completing the tri-set is a 70mm equivalent tele, a standard-issue non-periscope one.
Next, there is the iPhone 12 Pro Max' telephoto - Apple says 65mm, or 2.5x zoom. Count that from the all-new main cam. It's another 12MP module of similar size to Sony's, even if no one has specified it explicitly yet. The most important thing about this one is that it's the first smartphone camera with sensor-shift image stabilization - whatever else stabilized phone cam there is, relies on wiggling around a lens element. No wiggling of any sort is happening on the ultrawide - it's fixed focus.
That's 4 pockets filled to the brim with state of the art camera tech, and we'll go a little deeper into the numbers on the next page.
Rear camera hardware
Let's do it the other way around and start with the iPhone - after all, that's the one we've been waiting for to get this shootout going. The 12 Pro Max has an exclusive setup, one that builds on top of the 12 Pro's, and features a new primary camera and tweaked telephoto.
The primary camera features the first major upgrade to be seen on an iPhone in a long time - it still uses a 12MP sensor, but now, it is 47% larger than before and with bigger, 1.7µm pixels. The lens still has a 26mm equivalent focal length and an f/1.6 aperture, but this time around, it's not stabilized. Instead, this camera uses sensor-shift stabilization, moving the imager around in its plane to compensate for body shake.
Improvements can be seen in the telephoto too - it now offers slightly longer reach up to 2.5x. The lens has a 65mm equivalent focal length (up from 52mm) and an f/2.2 aperture (marginally dimmer than the 12 Pro non-Max' f/2.2) and is stabilized. This camera supports PDAF, but what it cannot do is Night Mode.
The ultrawide camera on the iPhone 12 Pro Max is the same that you'll find on every model in this year's lineup, and it's nothing special against competitors either. It uses a 12MP sensor with 1.0µm pixels, placed behind a 13mm f/2.4 lens. The focus is fixed, and there is no stabilization whatsoever, not that OIS ultra wides are really a thing. This camera, like the main one, supports Night Mode.
There's also a LiDAR Scanner, which some might call the iPhone's fourth camera. It assists the main and portrait cameras with detailed depth maps for portraits and faster autofocus in low-light conditions.
If we're counting auxiliary bits, the Mate 40 Pro's rotary phone dial-like camera cluster has a laser for autofocus, but that's hardly what's most important here. The Mate comes with a new ultra-wide camera, which now uses a 20MP sensor with a conventional Bayer RGB filter array instead of the 40MP Quad Bayer unit on the P40 Pro. It's not as wide as competing efforts - it has an 18mm equivalent lens, but it can autofocus, unlike the Samsung and Apple ones. An unusual detail is that the sensor has a native 3:2 ratio - like on a conventional camera, instead of the more squarish 4:3 units on most smartphones.
The primary camera is the 50MP one introduced on the P40 Pro, and it packs a 1/1.28" sensor, the largest of this group. An RYYB (red-yellow-yellow-blue) Quad Bayer type color filter is on top of the 1.22µm photosites making for a 2.44µm binned pixel size. The lens in front has an f/1.9 aperture and a 23mm equivalent focal length, though, for one reason or another, the default 12MP pictures come out with a small crop to 27mm.
The 12MP telephoto cam uses a stabilized periscope lens that delivers a focal length of 125mm or 135mm depending on whether you trust the official specs or the EXIF data in the photo files, effectively meaning 5x zoom. The f/3.4 aperture may sound quite dim compared to the Note20 Ultra's f/3.0 tele, but those numbers do need some real-world testing.
Since we already mentioned the Galaxy Note20 Ultra's periscope, let's elaborate on that. It uses a 12MP sensor with 1.0µm pixels - nothing too fancy. The 120mm equivalent lens is stabilized too, just like on the Mate.
The main camera on the Note relies on the 108MP 1/1.33" Nonacell sensor introduced with the S20 Ultra. It bins nine 0.8µm pixels into one large 2.4µm one and outputs 12MP images - nona-binning as Samsung calls it. The lens in front has a 26mm equivalent focal length and an f/1.8 aperture and is stabilized - probably easier than shifting that sensor around.
The ultra-wide-angle module is hardly impressive, much like on the 12 Pro Max, though the Galaxy does out spec the iPhone. A 12MP 1/2.55" sensor (1/3.6" on the iPhone) with 1.4µm pixels is placed behind an f/2.2 aperture lens that should deliver a 120-degree field of view. There's no autofocus on this one either, boo.
The Xperia 1 II does have autofocus on its ultra-wide camera and, similarly to the autofocusing ultra-wide on the Mate, it's not quite as wide as the fixed-focus units on the iPhone and the Galaxy. Sony quotes the focal length at 16mm equivalent, and there's a 12MP 1/2.55" sensor with 1.4µm pixels behind that - same numbers as on the Note.
The main cam has a 24mm equivalent lens with an f/1.7 aperture. It features optical image stabilization - Sony may be doing some of that sensor-shifting on its mirrorless camera bodies, but on the phones just yet. Not quite a mirrorless camera size, the sensor on the Xperia is still properly big in smartphone terms 12MP 1/1.7" unit with 1.8µm pixels - it makes for a similar configuration to what the iPhone has for its main cam.
The 12MP telephoto cam with the 70mm equivalent focal length apparently uses a 20MP 1/3.4" Samsung S5K3T2 sensor, and some cropping is somehow involved. The lens is stabilized; that much is clear.
Selfie camera hardware
Over on the front, these four phones adopt varied approaches as well. We have just one autofocusing selfie camera of the bunch, focal lengths span a fairly wide range, and some extra bits can be found here or there.
The iPhone 12 Pro Max has another trick to justify its notch - it's using the structured light 3D scanner for depth mapping in portrait mode. That aside, the actual camera uses a 12MP sensor with 1.0µm pixels and a 23mm f/2.2 lens. It's among the fixed-focused cameras this one.
So too is the Mate's selfie camera, only this one is 13MP. More importantly, it has a very wide 18mm equivalent focal length lens (f/2.4 aperture) that lets you capture more in the frame - be it friends or surroundings. The Mate 40 Pro also has a 3D depth mapping solution, but it is based on a time-of-flight camera.
There is no such thing on the Galaxy Note20 Ultra, but it has a unique feature of its own - it's the single selfie camera with autofocus in this group. The only lens with a moving element here has a 26mm focal length and an f/2.2 aperture. At 10MP, it's the second-lowest resolution sensor, but they are fairly big 1.22µm pixels, and do you really need more than 10 million of them?
Or 8, do you need more than 8MP selfies? Sony replies with a 'no' and fits the Xperia 1 II with an 8MP camera, the least impressive of the bunch. It's got a 24mm lens with an f/2.0 aperture.
Camera apps
The camera apps on these phones all offer the same general functionality and allow for easy mode switching, flipping between the front and rear cameras, and operating the various modules. Some let you do some things more easily, others get in the way a bit - we haven't really found one perfect app that hasn't annoyed us in one way or another.
Take the Mate's zoom selector, for example. While it's reasonably accessible when holding the phone in portrait with the right hand, getting at it when using the Mate with the left hand or in landscape in either direction invariably requires another hand (or a nose, depending on the situation). It can be and it is done better on the others.
A similar ergonomic oddity is the iPhone's in-viewfinder menu that you need to open with a tap on the far end of the screen and then actually go back to the near end to dial in your input. Another one is controlling Night mode, which on top of its similar far-near operation requires a tap and a swipe to disable - not that you'll really want to disable it with any amount of frequency.
The Galaxy isn't perfect either. Its zoom operation is flawed, too, with additional, non-camera-native 'x' presets popping up when you press on the tree selector. Then if you tap on one of those presets, the highlighted tree can show you a misleading zoom level.
We have a gripe with the Xperia's operation, too, of course. Tap somewhere to focus or bias the exposure, and a slider appears for exposure compensation in place of the zoom selector - why not right next to it, or better yet, next to where you tapped?
Mind you, that's just one of the Xperia's camera apps. It has two more, Photo Pro for stills and Cinema Pro for video recording. You should head over to the Xperia's review for more on those, but let's just mention here in passing that they both have their advantages and weak points.
With winter on our doorstep, operating your phone's camera with gloves is a pressing (wow, that pun really snuck up on us) concern, at least to this one reviewer here. He insists the Galaxy is the best of the bunch for this use case since it lets you launch the camera with a double press and even switch to selfies with a further double press. The volume keys serve as shutter release, as usual.
The Mate, too, will launch its camera app with a double press on a physical button (volume down) and then operate the shutter with either volume key. The Xperia has the dedicated shutter button for that (a nice feature that feels like a relic at times), and it can also use the volume rocker for capture. The iPhone is the least gloves-friendly - no mechanical way of launching the camera, though the volume rocker does work for shutter release. No way to mechanically switch to selfies on any of these three, however.
Okay, let's look at some pictures, finally.
Daylight photo quality, main camera
In broad daylight, all four phones take very nice photos with their main cameras - but you already knew that. Each has its own particular 'look,' but even those lines are becoming more blurred.
Perhaps the most distinct of these is the Xperia. Its images have the most contrast, which means that in certain demanding scenes, you might be left with somewhat deeper shadows (the cars in the castle sample) or clipped highlights (the snail). It wouldn't be correct to single out the Xperia by calling its dynamic range the narrowest. It's just that it doesn't apply its HDR algorithms with quite as much fervor as a Galaxy or an iPhone does.
The Xperia is also a little conservative when it comes to color saturation - we've been conditioned towards livelier output, though it will still produce nice colors in most situations. Even so, if you prefer a more 'photographic' and less 'social media' vibe, the Xperia will be a perfect match.
Daylight, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Speaking of, the Galaxy is perhaps the most 'social media' of the pack. A healthy dose of saturation alongside some added warmth, particularly in the greens, make for arguably the most easily likable colors, if not the most 'correct'. Having said that, it was a revelation that the skies which Galaxies have historically rendered as very cyan have been tweaked to a more realistic blue.
A cliche if we've ever heard one, the iPhone's colors are more true to life. It's particularly so in duller scenes where the Galaxy will give reality a bit of a boost. However, feed the Pro Max some orange fall leaves, and it'll give the Note a run for its money for color pop.
The Mate 40 Pro surprised us in this head-to-head. Specifically, it was comparatively less enthusiastic in the fall leaves scenes than both the iPhone and the Galaxy, perhaps even the Xperia. We'd be pleased with its output in these samples in isolation, but it did stand out in the pool. Weirdly enough, it's happy to match the competitors in color saturation for 'man-made' objects, just not leaves. The Mate's skies turned out different in these shots, too, with a faint purple tint next to the almost identically blue rivals.
Daylight, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
With all cameras here matched at 12MP, it's no surprise that the level of detail is very similar between the four. The Note isn't as aggressive as Galaxies once were with sharpening, and grass doesn't look overprocessed. If anything, it's the iPhone's rendition of random textures that bothers us more.
The Mate's grass is hit or miss - if the sensor is badly out resolved, textures get an artificial look, but if the pixels are enough, it looks good (snail shot). It is a bit lacking in micro-contrast - the stone masonry in the castle sample could use some better definition. The Xperia's rendition of fine detail is very natural too, but here we can point out that sharpness does deteriorate towards the extreme corners.
Noise performance is excellent on all four cameras.
Daylight, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight photo quality, ultra wide angle camera
Moving on to the ultra wides, the phones' approaches diverge, which becomes readily apparent in the coverage. The Galaxy and the iPhone have the widest field of view, and it's as good as identical between the two even though the iPhone EXIF info reports 14mm and the Galaxy's says 13mm. The Xperia is a little tighter but still very wide at 16mm. Meanwhile, the Mate's 18mm equivalent means it offers the narrowest field of view, plus its camera is in a different aspect (3:2 vs. 4:3 on the others), so it will further limit what you can capture vertically.
Daylight, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
What the Mate 40 Pro lacks in coverage, however, it easily makes up for fine detail. None of these other three can hold a candle to its resolving power, a combination of the highest-res sensor and its high-quality optics.
Between the Galaxy, the iPhone, and the Xperia, it's really a toss-up for detail, though perhaps the Note's ultra-wide does lose by a narrow margin when it comes to edge definition if you insist on looking carefully and for long. On the flip side, it's about this much superior in noise reduction - hardly any noise in its photos, minor speckling in the iPhone and Xperia shots.
Daylight, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
The iPhone and the Galaxy maintain their parity beyond coverage too. Color reproduction and dynamic are so similar most of the time that we'd be hard-pressed to tell them apart in a blind test. The Xperia is easier to spot - it tends to expose darker and has a more limited dynamic range.
Daylight, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight photo quality, telephoto camera
While the ultra wides do vary between the handsets here, they're not quite as different as the telephotos. We have the Galaxy and the Mate with 5x periscopes and the iPhone and the Xperia in the 2.5x-3x ballpark. We figured it would be wrong to compare the four just one of these two zoom levels, so we compared at both 5x and 2.5x.
That posed some issues of its own, mostly with the Xperia when trying to get to the 5x equivalent. The phone handles non-native zoom levels in a bizarre fashion - it counts the magnification from the respective camera you were on before starting to pinch-zoom. So you can do 3x from the main cam, which will go a tiny bit beyond the actual tele cam's zoom level, but the phone won't switch to the tele. You have to manually switch to the tele from the tree selector and the pinch to zoom further. In the end, we settled for a flat 2x pinch-zoom from here.
For the 2.5x zoom level, we went with the iPhone and Xperia's default tele cam magnification, and we pinched to 2.5x on the Mate and the Galaxy. Mind you, between the vastly different camera modules, all the pinch zooming, and the 'x' unit of measurement that's but a vague indication of what's happening, inevitably coverage will vary too, but it's roughly the same.
Starting out with the 2.5x zoom level, we see predictable results from the iPhone - it turns out sharp and detailed zoomed-in photos, which are also low on noise. The Xperia isn't quite there in terms of sharpness, and its shots are also... well, not washed out, but not a benchmark for contrast either.
The Note's attempts at demosaicking the 108MP sensor's data to get a 2.5x zoom image out of it fail to impress - in fact, they're borderline disappointingly soft.
Daylight, 2.5x-ish zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight, 2.5x-ish zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
And this is where the unlikely favorite emerges. The Mate 40 Pro's 2.5x zoom shots are as good as, maybe even better than the Xperia's - we'd say the Mate capture finer detail and has better edge definition than the Sony, even if its photos are a little noisier. The iPhone remains superior, but it's not by a wide margin, and it's great that the Mate can offer such versatility without having an actual mid-level zoom module.
Daylight, 2.5x-ish zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight, 2.5x-ish zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Zoom in to 5x, and there are no surprises here - there's a clear divide between team periscope and the plain sort-of teles. The Mate inches ahead and captures a little finer detail than the Note - it's not a huge advantage, but it's there.
The iPhone shots look perfectly good enough at fit-to-screen magnification. They can even stand up to pixel level scrutiny depending on the subject matter - the balcony blinds, for example. The Xperia, too, delivers decent photos at 5x - not as sharp and contrasty as the 12 Pro Max', but certainly usable.
Daylight, 5x zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight, 5x zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight, 5x zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Daylight, 5x zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low-light photo quality, main camera
We never doubted the phones can shoot great pictures in daylight, but shooting after dusk is more challenging. Let's see just how good are they in comparison to one another?
But first, a few words on methodology. The Galaxy Note20 Ultra and the Mate 40 Pro have dedicated Night modes that are selectable from the mode dial in the viewfinder. As such, they don't explicitly do 'night mode' processing when shooting in Photo mode, though at this point in time when multi-frame stacking is done on daylight shots and Quad Bayer/Nonacell sensors do different length exposures in principle, it's hard to tell what exactly is happening inside the phone, unless you're an engineer in one of the companies involved.
The iPhone has no separate Night mode. It has an Auto Night mode, which is used when the phone decides. You can force it on in situations below a certain light level, and you can also override the phone's decision to use it and disable it.
Meanwhile, the Xperia has no 'Night mode' per se. However, its scene detection algorithms acknowledge it's dark around and engage a 'Night scene' mode with some extra processing involved - we speculate it's a similar approach to what everyone is doing in low light outside of Night mode.
So, ultimately, we shot the test scenes twice. For the first pass, the Huawei and the Galaxy we kept in Photo mode, and we diligently disabled the Night mode on the iPhone while the Xperia was doing what it's doing.
For the second pass, we shot the scenes in Night mode on the Mate and the Note, and we let the iPhone's auto Night mode roam free. Since the Xperia doesn't have a Night mode, this second pass will be just between the other three phones.
With Night modes disabled, the Mate occasionally returns darker exposures than the other three, most pronounced in situations with warm street lighting, where it also stands out with a colder rendition than the more or less orange-leaning rest of the bunch. That, by the way, is a general rule with the Mate - when in doubt about white balance, it prefers erring on the cold side.
If we had to pick one phone for white balance and color handling in low light, it would be the iPhone 12 Pro Max. It doesn't have the Note's strong orange bias, nor the Mate's colder rendition. The iPhone gives the actual cold white sources a pleasing warming up.
Low light, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
The Note, meanwhile, renders cold lights colder and warm lights warmer, an exaggeration that's rarely good looking when there's a more pleasing approach for immediate comparison - otherwise not that bothersome all in itself.
The Xperia, on the other hand, is quietly good in its white balance most of the time, though it too can fall victim to the dreaded sodium-vapor lamp. Basically, if it's not the iPhone, you can expect some white balance inaccuracies.
Low light, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Subtle differences in dynamic range handling can be seen, but no so much in the extremes as in the lower mid-tones, which some render brighter than others at similar exposure values. However, these are hard to attribute to one phone in particular - choices vary from scene to scene, which isn't too encouraging. You can always tap to bias the exposure towards a particular area in the frame if that specific shadow is of crucial significance.
One relatively consistent peculiarity in performance we observed on the Mate. Perhaps related to its exposure tendencies, though likely in no small part also a matter of software, it handles bright light sources like neon signs with better edge definition and notably less haloing - that's an advantage.
Low light, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
As for detail at 1:1 magnification, the Note maybe has an edge, but mostly insignificant one. We're pinning it to the noise-vs-detail balance and Samsung's choice to lean towards retaining grain instead of wiping it clean. The Note's shots are, indeed, noisier than the rest. That said, the Mate keeps things cleaner yet doesn't really sacrifice any detail, and it looks the closest to having your cake and eating it in these situations.
The iPhone is good at sharp contrasting edges, but not quite as detailed in finer textures - it's behind these other two. Then comes the Xperia, which is consistently softer than the rest.
Low light, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
In Night mode, the Mate loses the most sharpness and drops to third place in this respect. The iPhone and the Galaxy trade narrow victories for detail from one shot to another, but for practical purposes, they're very similar, Night mode against Night mode.
Low light, main camera, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro
Low light, main camera, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro
Low light, main camera, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro
Dynamic range is roughly comparable between the three, with the iPhone slightly more prone to losing some of the highlights, the Note determined to save them, the Mate somewhere in between. As part of the highlight retention process, the Galaxy will also cancel out the halos around neon lights, something the Mate already does in Photo mode, but somehow not in Night mode. The iPhone can't be bothered, and halos are allowed in its photos.
Low light, main camera, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro
Low light, main camera, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro
Low light, main camera, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro
Low-light photo quality, ultra wide angle camera
The low-light performance of the ultra wides can actually be summarized relatively easily - one's great, the other three are okay. You can probably guess, but it's the Mate's big-sensor UW cam that is the least afraid of the dark and produces the cleanest, most detailed images with the widest dynamic range. Admittedly, it's still on the cold side with white balance, but at least it's consistent with the main cam.
Low light, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
The other three, while somewhat closely spaced, can still be ranked from okay to okay-ish in a Galaxy-Xperia-iPhone order, with the iPhone falling further behind if it gets particularly dark. The Note's shots can be noisy but do retain quite a lot of detail, and the dynamic range is nicely wide. The Xperia prioritizes noise reduction over detail, though it still manages to deliver some of it. The iPhone ranges from well detailed brightly lit subjects to downright smudgy ones in darker scenes and generally in the shadow areas.
Low light, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
In Night mode, things are a little different. The Mate goes for a 12MP 4:3 image in this mode, and that's a two-fold hit - lower resolution plus a further reduction in scene coverage because of the crop from the 3:2 sensor. On top of that, there's actually a reduction in dynamic range, specifically in the highlights. There's really not one scene where we prefer the Mate's Night mode ultra-wide shot over its regular Photo mode.
Ultra wide camera, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Ultra wide camera, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Ultra wide camera, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
That allows the iPhone and the Galaxy to, if not shine, at least appear competitive. There is, indeed, a significant improvement in the iPhone's results if you don't interfere with its auto Night mode, and that's why we feel that for its ultra-wide camera, it should be left ON at all times. You get much better shadow development this way and an overall better-exposed image, which is sharper on top of that.
The Note brightens things up, too and Night mode shots do have improved tonal properties, particularly the very dark ones. It's a bit of a hit and miss thing, however. It's the really dark scenes that benefit the most from Night mode in both dynamic range and detail, while the better-lit ones actually deteriorate on a pixel level when you use Night mode.
Ultra wide camera, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Ultra wide camera, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Ultra wide camera, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low-light photo quality, telephoto camera
Zooming in at night remains among the tougher challenges for smartphone photography, and we're still not at a point where teles can really be relied on in the dark. But we're getting there.
Starting at 2.5x because that's the iPhone's default and the iPhone is what we've been waiting for, we know not to expect a fight from the Galaxy - it threw in the towel in mid-level zooming in good light already.
In scenes where the iPhone does, in fact, shoot with its tele camera, it captures the sharpest photos of the bunch, and then it's mostly a tie between the Xperia and the Mate. If it's dark enough that the Pro Max falls back to its main camera for 2.5x shooting, the Mate and the Xperia can actually outperform it.
Low light, 2.5x-ish zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, 2.5x-ish zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, 2.5x-ish zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, 2.5x-ish zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
As was the case on the ultra-wide camera, the Mate's 2.5x zoom shots actually do get worse in Night mode. A similar development can be seen in the Galaxy's images, and with the iPhone not having a Night mode for the tele camera and the Xperia not having a Night mode at all, here are just a couple of scenes from the Huawei and the Samsung.
Low light, 2.5x-ish zoom, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • Mate 40 Pro • Galaxy Note20 Ultra • Mate 40 Pro
Going once again to 5x zoom level, and all of a sudden, the Mate has the strongest halos around mall signs. That's about everything bad that can be said of its images, however. They are otherwise properly great. Sharp, detailed, and clean from noise, they outclass the Note's on all three counts. The Note isn't bad, and its output is a level up from the digitally zoomed-in photos of the Xperia and the iPhone, but the Mate is just superior.
Having said that, we remain unconvinced about Huawei's white balance choices - even the ones among us that don't find a particular company's color science a dealbreaker when choosing a phone.
Low light, 5x zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, 5x zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, 5x zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low light, 2.5x zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Against our better judgment, we also tried Night mode. Images get softer on both phones (remember, only the Galaxy and the Mate have Night mode on the telephotos), though there is now some shadow detail lifted out of the extreme darkness. The Mate's output turns noisier too. Ultimately, we would refrain from Night mode in all but the most dire of situations.
Low light, 5x zoom, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • Mate 40 Pro • Galaxy Note20 Ultra • Mate 40 Pro
Portrait photos
Portrait modes between these are all over the place. The Xperia only lets you shoot portraits with the main cam at 1x zoom, the Galaxy offers you 1x and 2x magnifications, but both are captured on the main cam. Meanwhile, the Mate gives you 1x, 2x, and 3x magnifications in both a Portrait mode and an Aperture mode, each offering its own faux bokeh and the two modes differing in quality.
It's the iPhone that is the most straightforward - you can take portraits at 1x and 2.5x, and each uses the respective cam. It adds a Night Portrait mode, that one not available on the telephoto, as it doesn't have a Night mode at all.
With all these peculiarities, comparisons are hard to carry out in a remotely standardized way, but we tried anyway. Shooting at the widest magnification, here's what the images look like.
Portraits, 1x: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
The iPhone has the most faithful rendition of a human face with all the texture that's indeed there and zero skin smoothing. While we turned off all the beautification enhancements to the best of our ability, all three other phones draw the face with less detail, with the Xperia being outright soft.
None of the phones made any serious blunders with the subject isolation, and if you don't stare too closely at the top of the hair, this could almost pass for the real deal.
It gets even better at the 2.5x-ish setting - if you've got the 12 Pro Max, that is. The iPhone's picture is sharp, the subject separation is excellent, the tiny bokeh balls look nice, the blur is very realistic. It's as good as the shot above taken on a Sony a6500 with a Sigma 56mm f/1.4 lens wide open. Okay, almost as good.
Portraits, 2.5x-ish: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro
The Mate's rendition of out of focus highlights is quite good, too, while the Note's lights in the background are just blurred into the rest of it. However, the Galaxy's image is very soft, and we mean soft where it had to be sharp - the subject's face. The Mate's shot is bad in its own right - upscaled and sharpened beyond any reason.
Now, that's not the end for the Mate, though. Go into Aperture mode, and its zoomed-in portraits end up significantly better. Why is that? Beats us. The thing is, even at 1x zoom, the samples taken in Aperture mode have finer detail, compared to the Portrait mode ones.
Mate 40 Pro, Portrait vs. Aperture: Portrait, 1x • Aperture, 1x • Portrait, 2x • Aperture, 2x
Stepping outside for some torture testing, we placed our subject amidst some tree branches and fired away. Starting off with the widest setting again and shooting at a fairly distant subject, the results aren't spectacular, with blotches of sharpness and blurriness in the top left of the frame. The subject is well outlined, however, and the busy leaf-covered ground is made somewhat less distracting.
Portraits, 1x: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
We made this one a little more interesting by introducing a leaf immediately next to the camera for a nice blurry foreground. This does take your eyes off the mess in the top left corner, but a second look in there reveals the arbitrary blurring and the artificial nature of the effect.
Portraits, 1x: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
The zoomed-in level pictures have us more convinced. The tighter framing leaves less clutter for the algorithms to work out whether to blur or not and helps create a lot more believable results.
Portraits, 2.5x-ish: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro
Here's how that shot looks when taken on a proper camera.
Our attempt at low-light portraiture involved turning off most of the lighting in the little black studio you may have seen in our video reviews. A single LED panel was used to light the subject, at its minimum setting, though we didn't measure the actual light levels.
In any case, that proved too little light for the Xperia, which turned in a very soft image throughout - both background and subject.
The others didn't flinch and served up decently sharp portraits, certainly very good for the circumstances. Subject isolation is excellent on all three. The fake plant's twigs in the background couldn't pass for an extension of the subject's hair. The only objectionable bit is the Galaxy's white balance - our subject certainly isn't this purple in real life.
Portraits, 1x: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Video recording
Flagship phones have evolved into very capable camcorders, and the ones we have here certainly fit that profile. However, they aren't equally well equipped for the task, with a few limitations or extra features found here or there.
For example, only the Galaxy Note20 Ultra in this bunch can record 8K video. However, that alone doesn't make it the go-to choice, much like the Xperia 1 II's lack of native 4K60 capability isn't a dealbreaker per se. We did our best not to focus on the differences but compare them to what they can all do. We limited ourselves to 4K30 to keep this relatively simple and concise and maintain a reasonable level of sanity, though we did explore the telephoto range much like we tried with photos.
Starting from the basics, main camera videos in daylight are remarkably similar between the iPhone and the Galaxy in most respects - including, most surprisingly, color. Both record very appealing vivid hues without going overboard. The Mate, meanwhile, continues the somewhat cold streak we witnessed with fall photos into fall video. The Xperia opts for a slightly more desaturated look, particularly for the yellows, visible in direct comparison, but not something to make a big deal of on its own.
In terms of dynamic range, the Galaxy would be our winner - very cautious about preserving its highlights though not losing contrast in the process. The iPhone is that extra bit contrasty and will tend to render whites white, while the Note may try to come up with a light gray for those. The Mate and the Xperia are more frivolous with highlights, and you could end up with some of them blown, and the Mate, in particular, has a very contrasty tone curve and deeper shadows too.
Video screengrabs, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
The Note20 Ultra has the bunch's finest detail and renders it a very natural fashion. The iPhone is about there, but has some intricate details in the grass lost and, believe it or not, has its sharpening dialed higher than the Samsung. Not as high as the Mate, though - this one goes beyond reason and makes for a very gritty look. Not so on the Xperia, which has a softer, almost smooth look to fine textures - it's trailing in detail.
Out of these, only the Mate has any noise to speak of, and while you could potentially miss it in the sky, it's fairly obtrusive on the road surface, made all the more prominent by the aggressive sharpening.
The original videos from which we grabbed the above stills can be found in the playlist below - make sure to click through it for all four samples.
Ultra wide footage is again relatively comparable between the iPhone and the Galaxy, with the iPhone going slightly warmer and the Galaxy doing deeper blues. The Mate continues with its questionable color choices (at least it's consistent between cameras), while the Xperia prefers less color altogether.
The Note20 Ultra beats the Pro Max for detail again, both for quantity and quality, with the Xperia around iPhone levels in this one. The Mate is a different beast, its slightly longer focal length making things appear bigger in the frame and more detailed too, though it maintains the overprocessed look.
Video screengrabs, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Exposure and dynamic range here mimics the findings for the main cam. Sure enough, here are the videos.
Making our way to telephoto capture around the 2.5x mark, the iPhone and the Xperia lead the way and resolve about the same amount of detail. The Xperia is a bit hazy and not as contrasty as we'd like, much like in telephoto stills. The iPhone, on the other hand, has no such issues and delivers great contrast.
This intermediate zoom level proved problematic on the Note20 Ultra when it came to photos, while the Mate40 Pro was unfazed and delivered. In video, it's the other way around. The Mate's footage is very soft, all the while being grossly oversharpened. The Note's, while nowhere as sharp as the native 2.5x-3x zooms on the iPhone and the Xperia, is at least half-decent.
Video screengrabs, 2.5x zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
You can take a look at the full videos below.
At the periscopes' native zoom levels, things take a turn in the expected direction, with the Mate and the Galaxy assuming control of the matters. Having said that, the Huawei has a distinct advantage, delivering better contrast and finer detail, next to the Galaxy's altogether more washed-out results. The thing is, the iPhone and the Xperia aren't terribly bad at this level - perhaps better even than the Note and the Mate at half-zoom.
Video screengrabs, 5x zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Following below is the full set of 5x videos.
Low-light video quality
Up to around dusk, the phones maintain fairly acceptable video quality out of their main cameras. The Xperia gets notably noisier, the iPhone gets particularly soft, and both it and the Mate lose fine detail in the darker areas. We do like the iPhone's dynamic range and colors, though. The Galaxy does the finest job in terms of detail, but it's not great when it comes to color saturation.
Video screengrabs, main camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
One annoying bit of the Xperia's performance is the flicker caused by the street lights - your mileage will likely vary depending on the solution in your particular area, but it's what we have here. None of the other phones suffered from that.
The ultra wides suffer more badly as light levels drop with the iPhone going very soft, perhaps the only clip here we wouldn't call decent. The Note and the Xperia opt for the detail and noise side of the noise-reduction-vs-detail balance. The Mate's footage is usable too. It's just that we were hoping for more out of it, and the results are hardly enthusiasm-inducing.
Video screengrabs, ultra wide camera: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
At 2.5x zoom, the iPhone footage looks positively great under the circumstances. The Xperia tele doesn't cope quite as well, but it was trailing the iPhone in good light, and it's following it here too. The Galaxy footage is usable if you must, while you're better off avoiding the Mate's in-between zoom levels in the dark.
Video screengrabs, 2.5x zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
At 5x magnification in challenging light, the iPhone's footage is more of a mush than an actual video, and the Xperia throws in some big blocks of noise to spice up the softness. The Mate's tele doesn't enjoy these conditions one bit either and returns soft footage, combined with a disconcerting focus hunting. The Note20 Ultra, meanwhile, keeps its focus and retains a level of detail the others can only dream of.
Video screengrabs, 5x zoom: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
We limited our ultimate low-light test to just the main cameras since experience proved we should lower our expectations. The iPhone maintains the most likable colors and the widest dynamic range, while the Note goes into an orange mode. The Mate is doing quite well on the detail front, but the dynamic range is narrow. The Xperia, meanwhile, fails to gather enough light and produces an underexposed and noise image.
Video stabilization
Stabilization is available in all modes on these phones, and a couple of them even let you disable it - imagine that - the Galaxy and the Xperia. We decided to keep it on for this next test, however.
All four will successfully stabilize main camera footage captured while walking to a generally similar level of smoothness. The only exception is the Xperia, which does let a few steps make it to the video and can be a little twitchy. We observed no jello-ing on any of these (in 4K30), and panning introduced no weird effects.
Recording while running is obviously more demanding. If you're running on a relatively rough surface and looking at the phone and not your feet, you can expect shaky footage from all these, though the level of stabilization they provide is still better than none.
You'd get much more stable looking footage in such fast-paced conditions by switching to the ultra-wide cameras, which are inherently less prone to shake, plus they deliver that action-cam look. The Galaxy and the iPhone are spectacular for the task, the Mate and the Xperia - notably less so.
Selfies
The iPhone and the Mate have the most likable skin tones when it comes to selfies in our book. The Mate does walk a fine line between pleasing and too pink, and its saturation is the highest in general - skin tones and all, but we are okay with it. The Xperia and the Galaxy are more conservative, so you'll look closer to your pale self with those, barring using the skin enhancements.
Selfie samples: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Selfie samples: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
The iPhone would be our top choice for detail rendition, beating the Galaxy and the Mate. We'd say it resolves a bit more facial hair and pores next to the Note20 Ultra's more smeary rendition. At the same time, the Mate has roughly the same amount of pixels to allocate to a wider frame, so it's at a slight disadvantage by design. The Xperia can't really compete for detail - it's about time Sony replaced this module with something altogether nicer.
All four selfie cams have an excellent dynamic range thanks to auto-HDR processing though the Xperia is somewhat behind. The Galaxy usually doesn't have issues with dynamic range in contrasty scenes, but in overly demanding backlit scenarios, in particular, it joins the Xperia in coming up with darker faces and, by extension, harder to like selfies than the other two.
The iPhone and the Mate both excel at backlit shots, serving up tonally well-developed faces, all the while keeping the background highlights in check. However, that takes a significant toll on the Mate's facial detail, where we see excessive sharpening. The iPhone is more refined in this respect.
Selfie samples: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Selfie samples: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Selfie samples: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Selfie portrait photos
The iPhone's portraits come out in 7MP with a cropped-in frame, while the Mate only allows bokeh effects at the digitally zoomed-in 1.0x setting, though it still outputs images at 13MP. The Galaxy lets you choose between the native field of view of the camera or the cropped-in one, where the resolution is 6.5MP. The Xperia's selfie portraits are the same size as regular selfies.
Not the same dynamic range, however - the Sony can't do HDR when taking selfie portraits and backlit shots are problematic. The Galaxy, too, continues to struggle in such situations and renders faces darker than we'd like. Certainly darker than the iPhone and the Mate, which continue to deliver significantly better-exposed faces.
Selfie samples: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Our pick for subject isolation would be the Mate, which makes a precise distinction between subject and background in casual scenes. It properly us amazed with the way it handled the hair in the scene above - compare its sharp rendition at the top to the blurred out stray hair on the iPhone and the Galaxy. You can see it in this next sample too, which we've somehow missed shooting on the Xperia.
Selfie samples: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro
Meanwhile, the iPhone can be a bit iffy around shoulders and clothing, like in the first sample below against the brick wall in the distance. Our wooden wall paneling strikes again and strikes them all, Mate included, however.
Selfie samples: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Selfie samples: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Selfie samples: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Low-light selfies remain among the lagging bits in smartphone photography, but let's see where these ones stand. This first shot is mostly for gaining perspective on just how dark it was in the test scene, though a case could be made that this about as much light as you'd have in a bar. None of these photos we'd really consider usable.
Low-light selfie samples: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Screen flash to the rescue, even if your mates might (rightfully) object to such practices in social settings. The iPhone is the least enthusiastic about exposing your face properly, and we know it's not for lack of nits in that display - as such, it doesn't make a huge difference, though you could consider the photo salvaged.
The Mate and the Galaxy, on the other hand, do light up your face nicely, even if the Mate has messed things up with white balance and turned a gray T-shirt blue. The Xperia gets the face reasonably lit, though that doesn't help deliver a sharp photo.
Low-light selfie samples, screen flash: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
All but the Xperia have Night mode for selfies too. In this particular scene, the iPhone and the Galaxy did lift up the shadows on the dark side of the face, nudging the photo into barely usable, while the Mate did little besides imposing a crop on you.
Low-light selfie samples, Night mode: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro
Selfie video recording
Three out of four phones here can record video up to 4K resolution at 60fps with their selfies - the Mate, the iPhone, and the Galaxy. The Xperia, meanwhile, maxes out at 1080p/30fps.
Stabilization is available on all phones, in all modes. That comes with a caveat on the Mate, which has three magnifications in selfie video recording - the widest, which is also its native, isn't quite as well stabilized as its other two narrower ones are properly smooth.
The iPhone's stabilization is impeccable, as usual, while the Galaxy can suffer in fast pans or if your walking style has a bit of a march to it. The Xperia smooths out walking well but has this weird effect where pans take a split second to catch up, and framing your mug is a bit off in these moments.
We'd say video quality is best on the iPhone. It has the most detail in the face, for better or worse (we do like detail, wrinkled as the subject maybe), and has the most pleasing skin tones. The Galaxy comes next for detail, though with a slightly less appealing tint to the face, and the Mate has nice colors but not so much fine texture.
Video screengrabs: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
Additionally, the Mate's very short focal length means it has a considerable depth of field. So if you're after isolating your subject (yourself) from the background, you should look at the Note20 Ultra, which is most adept at that thanks to a combination of relatively large sensor, relatively big aperture, and autofocus. It's no Zenfone 7, but it's the thinnest DoF of this bunch.
However, the Mate's ultra-wide camera can't be beaten for coverage, and that's no small advantage for vlogging. Perhaps the widest setting may be too wide, and the trade-off with stabilization may not be worth it, but the mid-way 0.8x is probably just the perfect compromise.
Video screengrabs: Galaxy Note20 Ultra • iPhone 12 Pro Max • Mate 40 Pro • Xperia 1 II
The iPhone wins for dynamic range, which is most apparent in backlit scenes. The Mate can recover the highlights in photos, but not so much in video, which isn't helped by the very wide field of view that gets all sorts of contrast in the frame. It still gets your face well exposed, which is most important. The Galaxy exposes for your face better in video than in stills, seemingly, and the Xperia is, well, not on this level.
Here's a playlist of all four videos we shot. We limited this comparison to just 4K30 (1080p30 on the Xperia) for the sake of brevity and because it's the most apparent mode to use, but the findings apply just as well to the other modes.
Conclusion
Whew! That took some pixel peeping and staring at images for us to compile and, we imagine, for you to read to get to here. We know we revel in examining minute differences between phones, and phone cameras in particular, plus it's not like there's much else to do - 2020 is all about sitting home with eyes pointed at computer screens.
Our latest staring marathon led us to several conclusions. Or, rather, topics for further contemplation. Perhaps the most entertaining one is that without any revolutionary advancements and leaps, the iPhone remains a mighty great camera. We're not saying we don't like periscopes or autofocus everywhere (the iPhone has it on half of its 4 cameras, the fewest here), but a 0.5x extra zoom and a larger sensor on one cam are all they did this year, and it's hardly putting the 12 Pro Max in a trailing spot. Not to mention that the non-Max that has basically last year's imaging hardware is almost indistinguishably close to the Max.
Periscopes are a good thing, though, and we were especially thrilled about the one on the Huawei Mate 40 Pro, as it held its own for stills in good light and at night. Coupled with a primary camera that can fill in for in-between zoom levels, it raises questions whether we really need more than three modules or the right three are just enough. The Mate's video at intermediate zoom hints that Huawei hasn't gotten the right combo just yet, but it's a start.
Samsung's rear camera system, too, isn't without flaws. Its periscope lags behind the Mate's in photos but counters with better video, and we're not sure why we can't have it all. The main camera hasn't convinced us of its prowess either, despite the awe-inspiring numbers. Close to a year after the 108MP Nonacell sensor's debut, we'll concede that it can be great in a lot of circumstances, but here are a dozen pages of evidence that other approaches present viable alternatives, at times superior.
The Xperia 1 II is the one we're having the hardest time with. It's so promising in many ways, and we do really want to like it, but the results don't live up to the promise. Even if imperfections can be forgiven, flagships must still meet higher standards, and this one is outgunned by the trio it faces here. Its HDR processing game appears to be at least a year behind the rest.
We usually refrain from giving out awards and naming winners, specifically for matters that involve a significant degree of subjectivity. With the ever-increasing complexity of modern smartphone cameras, the notion that there can be a 'best' one is borderline absurd. What we can state for a fact is that two of the phones in this comparison will sell in numbers an order of magnitude higher than the other two. And it won't be because the Galaxy and the iPhone cameras are an order of magnitude better, no. But it's just how these things go.
0 Response to "iPhone 12 Pro Max vs. Mate 40 Pro vs. Xperia 1 II vs. Galaxy Note20 Ultra"
Post a Comment