Smartphone tests - DXOMARK https://www.dxomark.com/category/smartphone-reviews/ The leading source of independent audio, display, battery and image quality measurements and ratings for smartphone, camera, lens, wireless speaker and laptop since 2008. Thu, 12 Mar 2026 09:43:05 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3 https://www.dxomark.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/logo-o-transparent-150x150.png Smartphone tests - DXOMARK https://www.dxomark.com/category/smartphone-reviews/ 32 32 Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s26-ultra-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s26-ultra-camera-test/#respond Mon, 09 Mar 2026 10:35:47 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=191242&preview=true&preview_id=191242 We put the Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of [...]

The post Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 200MP 1/1.3″ sensor, 0.6µm pixels, 23mm equivalent f/1.4-aperture lens, multi-directional PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 50MP 1/2.5″ sensor, 0.7µm pixels, 120˚ field of view, f/1.9-aperture lens, dual pixel PDAF
  • Tele 1: 10MP 1/3.94″ sensor, 1.0µm pixels, 67mm equivalent f/2.4-aperture lens, PDAF, OIS
  • Tele 2: 50MP 1/2.52″ sensor, 0.7µm pixels, 111mm equivalent f/2.9-aperture lens, PDAF, OIS

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.


Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra
157
camera
160
Photo
Main
167

184

Bokeh
165

180

Ultra-Wide
139

169

Tele
141

170

153
Video
Main
160

186

Ultra-Wide
144

151

Tele
124

140

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 169

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 185

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 180

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 149

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 159

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Good white balance in most conditions
  • Wide dynamic range
  • Pretty effective video stabilization
  • High levels of detail in macro photos

Cons

  • Exposure and color instabilities in various conditions
  • Background noise in indoor and low light portraits
  • Loss of fine face detail in real-life scenes
  • Slight frame shifts during small panning shots in video

The Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra performs strongly in the DXOMARK Camera test, bringing meaningful and well-implemented improvements over the previous generation of Samsung flagship devices particularly in low light, where the larger aperture and refined image processing deliver better detail, lower noise, and more stable color performance. Across photo attributes, the device shows clear progress in color accuracy, texture and noise trade-off, and telephoto consistency.

However, despite these gains, the S26 Ultra still falls short of many competing flagships in several critical areas. Exposure can remain unstable, noise is still more pronounced than on several competitors, and autofocus reliability especially in low light and when shooting with the ultra-wide module continues to lag behind the best in class. These shortcomings are increasingly conspicuous in a market where rivals have pushed image quality forward at a rapid pace, raising the bar at the ultra-premium level.

On the video side, improvements in exposure, color, noise control, and stabilization contribute to a solid and versatile performance, even if the top performers continue to maintain a measurable edge in demanding conditions. Overall, the S26 Ultra does not yet challenge the segment leaders, but remains a substantial and coherent upgrade that strengthens Samsung’s position and brings it closer to the front of the pack without fully closing the gap.

BEST 149
Lowlight

One of the S26 Ultra’s standout improvements over its predecessors is its low-light performance. The new camera features a faster aperture alongside refined image processing across key attributes — including texture, noise, and color — resulting in significantly improved low-light scores for both photo and video, and a noticeable step forward from the previous generation.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra – Night shot: Bright rendering on HDR screen, nice colors
BEST 169
Portrait

A further benefit of the wider aperture is an improved signal-to-noise ratio in backlit, high-contrast scenes, resulting in cleaner portrait subjects with less noise, better texture, and more accurate colors. Overall, these upgrades allow the S26 Ultra to deliver more reliable performance and better image quality in challenging lighting conditions.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra – Nice bokeh effect
BEST 159
Zoom

The Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra offers a refined zoom experience, with the telephoto module delivering cleaner images thanks to improved noise control and more natural rendering — though fine detail capture has slightly decreased compared to the predecessor. Color reproduction has also improved, with more accurate tones and better white balance in natural scenes. Samsung has also addressed several of the sporadic telephoto issues seen on the S25 Ultra, resulting in a more reliable performance overall. The ultra-wide camera benefits from similar noise reduction improvements and produces clean, stable results outdoors, though low-light shooting still suffers from autofocus failures that reduce sharpness and impact wide-angle scores. Overall, the S26 Ultra’s zoom system brings meaningful refinements that enhance consistency and image quality across focal lengths.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

Photo

160

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

180

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, landscape and zoom photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

167

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

184

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra Photo scores
The photo Main tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses at 1x.

The Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra delivers a noticeable step forward in several key photo attributes, thanks to a wider aperture on the primary camera module and an updated image processing pipeline. The most significant gains come in color, where white balance is generally more accurate and skin tones are nicely rendered, as well as in texture and noise trade-off, which shows clear progress across most lighting conditions.

However, some of the shortcomings observed on the previous model persist. The exposure score remains unchanged, due to instabilities between consecutive shots that make results somewhat unpredictable in challenging scenes. Contrast handling in high-contrast scenes also remains an area of concern, with backgrounds often appearing flat.

While the improvements in detail retention and noise reduction are welcome, the S26 Ultra still lags behind some high-end competitors in those categories. Noise remains noticeable, particularly when shooting indoors or in low light, and fine detail is not always rendered at the level expected from a flagship device. As a result, the S26 Ultra shows solid progress but stops short of fully closing the gap to the best-in-class devices.

Close-Up

The Galaxy S26 Ultra’s close-up performance meets top-end flagship expectations, delivering high levels of detail and accurate colors in both indoor and outdoor scenes. However, in dimmer conditions, image quality is affected by noticeable noise.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra – High levels of detail, accurate white balance
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – High levels of detail, slightly cold cast
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Good detail, blue color cast
Exposure
125

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

134

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

The Galaxy S26 Ultra delivers good exposure performance in lab testing, with solid target accuracy and wide dynamic range. The camera typically aims for a bright overall rendering, but remains well within acceptable limits, giving images a distinctive look. Dynamic range is a notable strength, with good highlight retention in both lab and real-life scenes.

That said, some limitations persist. Our experts observed exposure inconsistencies across several conditions, particularly in low-light and backlit scenes, where brightness can vary noticeably between consecutive shots. Contrast handling in very bright areas of the frame is also an issue, as highlight tone compression can produce flat, unrealistic-looking spots in the brightest parts of the image.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra – Accurate (and bright) exposure, nice colors
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Accurate exposure, nice colors
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Accurate exposure, nice colors
Samsung Galaxy  S26 Ultra – Accurate face exposure, unnatural contrast in brightest part of the image
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Slightly darker face exposure, but more natural highlights
Color
130

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

133

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Color is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Color is one of the areas where the Galaxy S26 Ultra shows the most significant improvement over its predecessor. The device offers a well-balanced white balance response across nearly all test scenes, resulting in a strong overall color score that places it close to the category leaders. White balance is a standout strength, remaining accurate across a wide range of conditions — from backlit outdoor scenes to artificial low-light environments. The S26 Ultra also delivers pleasing, natural skin tones in most situations.

Some limitations remain, however, particularly in scenes where the subject is positioned in the brightest parts of the frame. In these situations, highlight color compression can result in occasional skin tone inaccuracies. Additionally, skies are sometimes rendered with a slight tendency toward muted or greyish tones. That said, these issues occur primarily in demanding high-brightness scenarios and are common across most devices.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra – Nice colors and skin tones
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Nice colors and skin tones
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Nice colors and skin tones,  slightly darker exposure on background face
Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra – Neutral white balance and pleasant skin tones
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Yellow-green white balance cast
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Warm white balance and pleasant skin tones
Sharpness & Timing
110

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

135

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Autofocus irregularity and speed: 5Lux Δ0EV Tungsten Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

In laboratory testing, the Galaxy S26 Ultra demonstrates fast and reliable autofocus in bright light, achieving quick AF lock with good accuracy. In low-light conditions, however, there is a noticeable capture delay of 0.5 to 1.5 seconds between the shutter press and actual capture, which can result in missed shot opportunities. Despite the slowdown in dim conditions, autofocus precision remains generally solid, with only minor issues observed in real-life scenes.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra
Autofocus failure, low brightness on face and low level of detail preservation
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
Sharp and bright portrait

One additional factor affecting the focus score is the shallow depth of field. In group shots, typically only the subject closest to the camera appears fully sharp, while people positioned further back — along with the background tend to look blurred. Unlike some rivals, the S26 Ultra employs no hardware or software mechanism to compensate for this, leaving its depth-of-field performance slightly behind that of some competitors.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra - Depth of field
Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra - Shallow depth of field, second face slightly out of focus
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Depth of field
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Wide depth of field, both faces in focus
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL - Depth of field
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL - Wide depth of field, both faces in focus
Texture
124

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

132

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for handheld conditions
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

The Galaxy S26 Ultra delivers improved detail over its predecessor, maintaining higher levels of fine detail, with better rendering of facial features across various lighting conditions in real-life scenes. Texture performance also benefits from more effective handling of high-contrast scenes, where details are now better retained across both highlight and shadow areas.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra - Texture
Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra - Good detail, controlled noise
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Texture
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra - Good detail, noticeable noise
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Texture
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Good detail, controlled noise

However, detail rendering is not always consistent and very few times it even fails to match Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra details rendering. If compared to Apple iPhone 17 Pro, the lower image resolution in bright light conditions leads to poorer fine details reproduction than the Apple flagship.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra
Low face detail preservation
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
Sharp face details
Noise
117

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

Noise management has also been clearly improved on the Galaxy S26 Ultra. While the S25 Ultra suffered from pronounced noise — particularly in backlit scenes Samsung has reworked its processing pipeline, resulting in a noise profile that is now much more acceptable for a flagship device. Progress is evident across most lighting conditions, with a notable reduction in noise levels and a noise score that approaches that of the Apple iPhone. In extreme lowlight conditions (below 10 lux), The Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra goes for a different strategy to predecessor, by allowing more noise for more natural details rendition on the scene.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra
Weaker denoising for better details rendition
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
Stronger denoising, fine details are locally lost

That said, a significant gap to the best-in-class devices remains, in both lab measurements and perceptual evaluation. In many real-life scenes, especially portraits, background noise remains distracting across various lighting conditions, and lab metrics continue to show higher noise levels than those of most top-end competitors.

When considering texture and noise together, the Galaxy S26 Ultra shows a clear improvement over the previous generation. Despite this progress, however, the combined performance still trails that of the leading competitors, who offer cleaner backgrounds and more consistent fine detail across all conditions.

Samsung S26 Ultra - Noise
Samsung S26 Ultra - Slight background noise
Samsung S25 Ultra - Noise
Samsung S25 Ultra - Quite noticeable background noise
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Noise
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Slight background noise
Artifacts
75

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

81

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Overall, Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra is improved compared to previous version, but some artifacts like halo and fusion artifacts remains sometimes visible, which has become very rare on competition.

Main photo artifacts penalties

 

 

 

Bokeh

165

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

180

Vivo X300 Pro
i

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

The Galaxy S26 Ultra offers a capable portrait mode with generally accurate subject segmentation that handles most outlines well, though small details such as fine hair or intricate edges still show occasional imprecision. The background blur is convincing and stable, though users may notice subtle shifts in color or exposure compared to the standard photo mode. While the overall rendering is pleasing, texture preservation does not match the very best smartphone cameras in this category, leaving some fine details slightly softened.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra - Bokeh mode
Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra - Inaccurate segmentation of fine detail (hair), loss of face detail
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL - Bokeh mode
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL - Slightly inaccurate segmentation of fine detail (hair), loss of fine face detail, low noise
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Bokeh mode
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Accurate segmentation of fine detail (hair), loss of fine face detail, low noise

Tele

141

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

170

Vivo X300 Pro
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

The S26 Ultra’s telephoto score remains close to that of last year’s model, with only minor progression. While texture measurements show some decrease (graph below with lower DMC score on most zoom ratio tested), improved noise levels result in cleaner images overall. Although perceived sharpness is slightly lower, the overall rendering appears more natural. Color reproduction also shows progress, with more accurate tones and better white balance in real-life scenes. Additionally, several of the occasional telephoto failures observed during S25 Ultra testing are no longer present on the S26 Ultra, contributing to a more reliable experience overall.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
Samsung S26 Ultra - Tele
Samsung S26 Ultra - Natural texture/noise rendering, pleasant colors
Samsung S25 Ultra - Tele
Samsung S25 Ultra - Unnatural texture/noise rendering, artifacts and greenish cast
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL - Tele
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL - Slightly unnatural texture/noise rendering

UltraWide

139

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

169

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

Measurements from the S26 Ultra’s ultra-wide camera show improved noise levels compared to the previous generation, consistent with the progress observed on the primary and telephoto modules. In outdoor conditions, the ultra-wide delivers good overall quality, with clean images and stable rendering. In low light, however, autofocus failures significantly impact the texture score, leading to reduced sharpness and dragging down the overall wide-angle score compared to predecessor and other flagships.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
Samsung Galaxy  S26 Ultra – Nice colors, brightest rendering, fine details on fabric are lost
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Nice colors, slight lack of brightness on face
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Nice colors, fine details very well recovered

Video

153

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

172

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

 

The Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra’s video mode benefits from improved multi-frame processing, enhanced HDR video algorithms, and refined optical image stabilization hardware. The device supports up to 8K recording and offers 4K capture across multiple focal lengths, leveraging its advanced sensor-shift OIS and gyro-EIS fusion stabilization system. Testing was conducted at 4K resolution, 60fps, and with HDR10 activated, which yielded the best overall results.

Overall, the S26 Ultra represents a meaningful improvement over the S25 Ultra in video, offering reliable exposure, attractive color, solid noise control, and effective stabilization. While it does not quite redefine video quality in the ultra-premium segment, it remains a versatile performer that will satisfy most users — even if the very best video-focused devices still maintain a measurable edge, particularly in low-light conditions.

Main

160

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

186

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra Video scores
Video Main tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.
Exposure
121

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

133

Vivo X300 Pro
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

Video exposure is generally good across all conditions and scene types. The S26 Ultra maintains stable target exposure and wide dynamic range, particularly in bright scenes where highlight clipping is well contained — broadly on par with the S25 Ultra and iPhone 17 Pro. Occasionally, target exposure can run slightly low, for example in backlit portrait situations.

Auto-exposure works effectively, with correct adaptation to changes in illumination. In one test scene featuring a subject appearing in front of a window, adaptation was slow, though the eventual target exposure was correct.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra – Accurate and stable target expsoure

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Accurate and stable target expsoure

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Accurate and stable target expsoure
Color
119

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

131

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Video color rendering is generally pleasing, with natural tones and convincing skin tones across most daylight and indoor scenes. White balance can show noticeable oscillations during changes in illumination, especially under mixed or transitional lighting and at lower light levels, which affects consistency. In low light, skin tones can also appear slightly unnatural, particularly darker complexions.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra – Slightly inaccurate skin tones and color

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Slightly inaccurate skin tones and color

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Acceptable skin tones and color
Sharpness & Timing
88

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

124

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
i

For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.

Autofocus is one of the weaker aspects of the S26 Ultra’s video performance. While the laser-assisted phase-detection system is mostly accurate in simple scenes, it is slow to adapt to abrupt focus plane changes, particularly in low light. Subject tracking lacks smoothness and continuity when following moving subjects, and occasional focus breathing is noticeable, especially during reframing or when subjects move toward or away from the camera.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra – Slight loss of focus at the start of tracking

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Good focus tracking

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Good focus tracking
Texture
106

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

118

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Noise
119

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

129

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

The S26 Ultra’s approach to video texture and noise tuning differs from that of the S25 Ultra, which is particularly noticeable in low light. Texture rendering is acceptable, with sufficient detail for most use cases, though in daylight recording, a loss of very fine detail and sharpness is noticeable compared to the best competitors in the segment and even the predecessor S25 Ultra.

Noise is well controlled in daylight and under typical indoor lighting — a clear differentiator from the S25 Ultra, enabled by the newer model’s wider aperture. In low light, Samsung appears to prioritize clean, noise-free images, particularly in portrait scenes, applying relatively aggressive denoising. While this results in visually cleaner footage, it comes at the expense of detail preservation in many situations, introducing artifacts such as areas of moving texture and background deformations.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra – Well controlled noise, loss of detail

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Visible noise, lack of detail

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Well controlled noise, loss of fine detail
Stabilization
116

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

124

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Video stabilization is another strong point of the S26 Ultra, even with the new horizon lock feature — designed to keep framing level — disabled. This feature is not covered by our test protocol, as it is disabled by default. The system performs well at keeping footage stable when walking, when recording handheld while stationary, and even during more dynamic camera motion. Footage is smooth and watchable, broadly comparable to that of the iPhone 17 Pro in most conditions.

On the downside, minor frame shifts are noticeable during small panning movements, likely due to interaction between the optical and electronic components of the stabilization system. While not dramatic, this artifact can be distracting in otherwise smooth sequences.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra – Effective stabilization

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Effective stabilization

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Effective stabilization
Artifacts
88

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

89

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main video artifacts penalties

UltraWide

144

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

151

Motorola Signature
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Tele

124

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

140

Vivo X200 Ultra
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Compared to the S25 Ultra, the S26 Ultra shows a significant decrease in texture measurements when zooming in video mode, indicating a clear loss of fine detail when recording across both the telephoto and ultra-wide camera modules. Despite this, the rendering appears more natural, with fewer artifacts, less noise, and reduced oversharpening. Samsung is likely to address the texture tuning in an upcoming firmware update, and may yet match or surpass the S25 Ultra’s texture measurements in the near future.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra – Slight field-of-view jumps between camera modules, relatively consistent image quality

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Slight field-of-view jumps between camera modules, consistent image quality

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Slight field-of-view jumps between camera modules, consistent image quality

The post Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s26-ultra-camera-test/feed/ 0 duo_seinenight (2)_ref solo_treegirl_PORTRAIT (4)_Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra FlowerMacro_SamsungGalaxyS26Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 FlowerMacro_SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 FlowerMacro_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark_05-00 HelloMotion_SamsungGalaxyS26Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 HelloMotion_SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 HelloMotion_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark_05-00 Backlit_Curtain_SamsungGalaxyS26Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 Backlit_Curtain_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark_05-00 BoysBand_SamsungGalaxyS26Ultra_DxOMark_06-00 BoysBand_SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 BoysBand_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark_05-00 duo_nightseine (3)_Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra duo_nightseine (2)_Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra duo_nightseine (2)_iPhone 17 Pro Max solo_columnlean_ULTRAWIDE (2)_ref solo_columnlean_ULTRAWIDE (2)_Google Pixel 10 Pro XL solo_columnlean_ULTRAWIDE (2)_iPhone 17 Pro Max Google Pixel 10a Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-10a-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-10a-camera-test/#respond Thu, 05 Mar 2026 13:00:57 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=191172&preview=true&preview_id=191172 We put the Google Pixel 10a through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of [...]

The post Google Pixel 10a Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Google Pixel 10a through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 48 MP, f/1.7, 25mm (wide), 1/2.0″, 0.8µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 13 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide), 1/3.1″, 1.12µm

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.


Google Pixel 10a
134
camera
149
Photo
Main
167

184

Bokeh
150

180

Ultra-Wide
155

169

Tele
99

170

109
Video
Main
150

186

Ultra-Wide
134

151

Tele
25

140

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 169

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 185

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 180

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 149

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 159

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Exposure is generally accurate in most tested conditions, with a fairly wide dynamic range. (Photo Video)
  • Autofocus is fast and repeatable most of the time. (Photo & Video)
  • Fairly neutral white balance and good color rendering in most tested conditions. (Photo & Video)
  • Good rendering of fine detail in daylight and indoor conditions. (Photo & Video)
  • The ultrawide camera delivers images with accurate exposure, colors, and details. (Photo & Zoom)

Cons

  • Noise can be very visible in low-light conditions. (Photo & Video)
  • Exposure and white balance instabilities are sometimes visible in dimer light conditions (Photo)
  • Level of detail is limited in challenging lighting conditions. (Video)
  • Some focus instabilities are occasionally visible. (Video)
  • Limited zoom capabilities with no dedicated tele module. (Photo and Video Zoom)

The Google Pixel 10a delivers strong overall performance, particularly in still photography. In bright conditions, image quality is impressive and in line with the Pixel 10 Pro XL, with accurate exposure and pleasant, well-balanced colors. Faces are often rendered with a slightly brighter target exposure, which contributes to flattering portrait results. The camera achieves a good texture-to-noise trade-off in well-lit environments, preserving fine details while keeping noise levels under control. The ultra-wide camera is another highlight, producing images with accurate exposure, natural colors, and a solid level of detail, making it a meaningful advantage in its category. In addition, the wider depth of field in photo mode compared to the Pixel 10 Pro XL can be beneficial for landscape shots and group pictures, where maintaining sharpness across multiple subjects is important.

That said, some limitations remain. The absence of a dedicated telephoto module reduces zoom flexibility, with magnification relying primarily on cropping from the main sensor. As a result, zoom performance is more limited compared to devices such as the iPhone Air. In lower light conditions, visible noise increases and fine detail decreases and minor exposure instabilities may occasionally appear. In video mode, some focus instabilities can also be noticeable.

Google Pixel 10a – Bright face rendering and pleasant skin tones, sharp image with well controlled noise in bright conditions
BEST 149
Lowlight

In low light, the Pixel 10a shows a noticeable drop in performance compared to the Pixel 10 Pro XL. Noise becomes more visible, and target exposure can sometimes be slightly lower than expected. Colors remain generally pleasant, although occasional color casts may appear under artificial lighting.

While photo mode still retains a decent level of detail for the price segment, fine detail preservation is weaker in video, where texture loss becomes more apparent. Despite these limitations, low-light performance remains fairly competitive within its segment.

Google Pixel 10a – Slightly lower target exposure, pleasant colors and good level of details
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Accurate target exposure, pleasant colors and pretty good level of details
BEST 169
Portrait

Portrait mode on the Pixel 10a provides a reliable experience, with good exposure on faces and pleasant color rendering. In bright lighting, the camera maintains a good level of detail, resulting in sharp and natural-looking portraits. The wider depth of field is particularly beneficial for group shots, ensuring that multiple subjects remain in focus. Overall, the device performs well for portrait photography in its price range.

Google Pixel 10a – Pleasant portrait rendering with neutral white balance
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Pleasant portrait rendering with neutral white balance but slight darker face exposure
BEST 159
Zoom

The ultra-wide camera delivers good quality images in photo mode, with accurate exposure, pleasant colors, and a satisfactory level of detail. However, the lack of a dedicated telephoto module significantly limits zoom versatility. Zooming relies primarily on cropping from the main sensor, resulting in reduced detail at higher magnification levels. As a result, overall zoom performance falls short of devices such as the iPhone Air, particularly at longer focal lengths.

Google Pixel 10a
Low level of details
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL
Good level of details

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

Google Pixel 10 A Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

Photo

149

Google Pixel 10a

180

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, landscape and zoom photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

167

Google Pixel 10a

184

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Google Pixel 10 A Photo scores
The photo Main tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses at 1x.
Exposure
132

Google Pixel 10a

134

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Color
128

Google Pixel 10a

133

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Exposure and color are the key attributes for technically good pictures. For exposure, the main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.
For color, the image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Sharpness & Timing
114

Google Pixel 10a

135

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

Edge acutance irregularity and average shooting delay along all tested conditions
This graph illustrates focus irregularity and speed as well as zero shutter lag capability, for different light conditions. Each point is the result of the aggregation of the measurements for a group of 30 pictures per conditions. The y-axis shows the average acutance difference with the best focus in percentage. The lower the better. On the x-axis, a negative delay means the photo is taken just before the user triggers the shutter, a positive delay means the photo is taken just after. The closer to 0 ms, the better. Acutance and delay are measured respectively using the Dead leaves chart and the LED Universal Timer, on the AF HDR Setup.
Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Texture
122

Google Pixel 10a

132

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for handheld conditions
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Noise
119

Google Pixel 10a

129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Artifacts
79

Google Pixel 10a

81

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main photo artifacts penalties

Bokeh

150

Google Pixel 10a

180

Vivo X300 Pro
i

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

Tele

99

Google Pixel 10a

170

Vivo X300 Pro
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

Google Pixel 10 A Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

UltraWide

155

Google Pixel 10a

169

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

Google Pixel 10 A Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Video

109

Google Pixel 10a

172

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

150

Google Pixel 10a

186

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Google Pixel 10 A Video scores
Video Main tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.
Exposure
102

Google Pixel 10a

133

Vivo X300 Pro
Color
117

Google Pixel 10a

131

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.
Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Texture
96

Google Pixel 10a

118

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Noise
93

Google Pixel 10a

129

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.
Stabilization
113

Google Pixel 10a

124

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Artifacts
80

Google Pixel 10a

89

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main video artifacts penalties

UltraWide

134

Google Pixel 10a

151

Motorola Signature
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Tele

25

Google Pixel 10a

140

Vivo X200 Ultra
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

The post Google Pixel 10a Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-10a-camera-test/feed/ 0 GreyBuilding_GooglePixel10A_DxOMark_05-00 GameRoom_GooglePixel10A_DxOMark_05-00 GameRoom_GooglePixel10ProXL_DxOMark_05-00 FaceToFace_GooglePixel10A_DxOMark_05-00 FaceToFace_GooglePixel10ProXL_DxOMark_05-00 Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/tecno-camon-50-ultra-5g-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/tecno-camon-50-ultra-5g-camera-test/#respond Tue, 03 Mar 2026 10:49:36 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=190908&preview=true&preview_id=190908 We put the Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important [...]

The post Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50 MP, f/1.8, 23mm (wide), 1/1.56″, 1.0µm, PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 8 MP, f/2.2, 14mm, 112˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0″, 1.12µm
  • Tele: 50 MP, f/2.4, 70mm (telephoto), 1/2.88″, 0.61µm, PDAF, 3x optical zoom

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.


Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G
146
camera
154
Photo
Main
166

184

Bokeh
155

180

Ultra-Wide
122

169

Tele
126

170

132
Video
Main
136

186

Ultra-Wide
98

151

Tele
121

140

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 169

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 185

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 180

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 149

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 159

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Generally pleasant exposure and colors. Well-rendered skin tones for all skin types in photo
  • Autofocus is rather fast and accurate, with some extended depth for group pictures thanks to AI face detail enhancement
  • Especially considering the price range, level of details is high, with limited noise in most conditions (even in night/lowlight)
  • Tele photo performance is consistent with main camera (photo & video)
  • Generally good level of details and low noise in video
  • Decent Portrait mode

Cons

  • Exposure instabilities (overall lightness and contrast) and to a lesser extend white balance instabilities can be noticeable in most conditions (photo & video)
  • Some artifacts like fusion artifacts and face rendering artifacts can be noticeable in photos (main & tele)
  • Ultra wide camera quality lags a bit behind main and tele

The Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G’s main camera delivers consistently strong performance across a range of conditions. Exposure and color reproduction are generally pleasant, producing images that feel natural and well-balanced. Skin tones are accurately rendered across different skin types, and fine details are preserved, resulting in sharp, clear photos. Autofocus is fast and precise, allowing easy capture of both static and moving subjects. Group shots benefit from extended depth, enhanced by AI face detail optimization, which keeps faces well-defined even at the edges of the frame.

Noise is well controlled in most situations, including indoor and moderately low-light settings, while artifacts, such as occasional face rendering inconsistencies, sometimes impact overall image quality. The camera also handles dynamic range reasonably well, maintaining detail in highlights and shadows in most scenes. Overall, the Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G delivers a pleasing photography experience for its price segment.

Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G – Bright face rendering and neutral skin tones even in complex environments, sharp image with well controlled noise
BEST 149
Lowlight

In low light, the Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G maintains a good level of detail with limited noise. Faces are generally bright and well-rendered, although they can appear slightly brighter than the background in some situations. Exposure instabilities, particularly in overall lightness and contrast, as well as occasional white balance fluctuations, can be observed in challenging lighting conditions. Despite these limitations, the camera produces neutral skin tones and sharp images down to low-light environments, offering strong performance for its price segment.

BEST 169
Portrait

Portrait mode on the Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G delivers a solid and reliable experience, producing natural skin tones even in challenging or complex environments. Depth rendering is generally accurate, providing a convincing separation between subject and background, though subtle depth artifacts can occasionally be noticed. Minor rendering instabilities may appear in certain scenes, but they rarely detract from the overall image quality. Overall, the mode produces consistently pleasing results, making it well-suited for everyday portrait shots.

Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G – Bright Portrait rendering with pleasant skin tone rendering
Google Pixel 9a – Cold cast, slight low brightness, neutral skin tone
Samsung Galaxy A56 – Slight green cast, and natural skin tones, no HDR format available
BEST 159
Zoom

The Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G telephoto lens performs consistently with the main camera in both photo and video capture, providing reliable detail and low noise. The ultra-wide camera quality is slightly lower, with images that can be less sharp and exhibit more noise compared to the main and telephoto lenses. Overall, the zoom performance is solid for mid-range photography needs.

Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G
Slight visible noise, fine details preserved
Google Pixel 9a
Slight noise visible, fine details are lost

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

Photo

154

Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G

180

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, landscape and zoom photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

166

Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G

184

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G Photo scores
The photo Main tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses at 1x.
Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Texture
122

Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G

132

Vivo X200 Ultra
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for handheld conditions
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

Tele

126

Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G

170

Vivo X300 Pro
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

UltraWide

122

Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G

169

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Video

132

Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G

172

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

136

Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G

186

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G Video scores
Video Main tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

The post Tecno Camon 50 Ultra 5G Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/tecno-camon-50-ultra-5g-camera-test/feed/ 0 image (1) 105_025_TecnoCamon50Pro 105_025_GooglePixel9a 105_025_SamsungGalaxyA56 Motorola Razr Fold Camera Test https://www.dxomark.com/motorola-razr-fold-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/motorola-razr-fold-camera-test/#respond Mon, 02 Mar 2026 04:51:59 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=190688&preview=true&preview_id=190688 We put the Motorola Razr Fold through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of [...]

The post Motorola Razr Fold Camera Test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Motorola Razr Fold through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50MP 1/1.28″ sensor, 1.22 µm pixels, 23mm equivalent f/1.6-aperture lens, PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 50MP 1/2.76″ sensor, 0.64 µm pixels, 12mm equivalent f/2.0-aperture lens, PDAF
  • Tele: 50MP 1/1.95″ sensor, 0.8 µm pixels, 71mm equivalent lens, dual-pixel PDAF, OIS
  • Video: 8K at 30fps with Dolby Vision, 4K at 30/60/120fps with Dolby Vision, 1080p up to 240fps, gyro-EIS

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.


Motorola Razr Fold
164
camera
169
Photo
Main
175

184

Bokeh
165

180

Ultra-Wide
161

169

Tele
153

170

154
Video
Main
168

186

Ultra-Wide
148

151

Tele
103

140

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 169

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 185

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 180

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 149

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 159

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Good exposure and wide dynamic range in most conditions
  • Accurate white balance and nice color in most conditions
  • Generally good detail and limited noise in photo mode
  • Fast and accurate autofocus, wide depth of field allows for good sharpness in group shots
  • Good ultra-wide and tele shots, with nice colors and a good texture/noise trade-off
  • Nice portrait shots, with good subject isolation and a natural blur effect

Cons

  • Occasional noise even in daylight, especially in backlit video scenes
  • Video autofocus sometimes slow to adapt, especially in low light
  • Exposure stepping during transitions
  • Color quantization, ringing and color fringing can be noticeable in photos, slight ghosting on moving subjects in video
  • Some white balance stepping when zooming in video mode

The Motorola Razr Fold delivered a well-rounded performance for a foldable device in the DXOMARK Camera tests. The optically stabilized 50MP primary camera and the 50MP ultra-wide both offer reliable exposure, nice colors and good detail in everyday use, outperforming folding competitors, such as the Honor Magic V5 and Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7, in the camera department. Zoom quality and performance are very good for a foldable device, too, and the fast autofocus and natural portrait rendering allow for a wide range of photographic styles and applications. On the downside, occasional artifacts, such as color fringing or motion blur, are a reminder that the Razr Fold is not quite on the same level as the best slab phones.

Motorola Razr Fold – Pleasant portrait rendering with accurate exposure and color (85mm equivalent)
BEST 149
Lowlight

In low light, the Razr Fold is capable of maintaining solid exposure and color accuracy, but image noise becomes more intrusive, especially in backlit scenes. The primary camera’s optical image stabilization helps avoid camera shake but the autofocus can slow down noticeably in low light, occasionally resulting in delayed captures. Still, the Razr Fold is a good option for casual night shots, even though it cannot match the best-in-class in terms of low light performance.

Motorola Razr Fold – Pleasant exposure and natural skintone rendering, with good detail rendering and limited noise
Honor Magic V5 – Pleasant exposure with slight cast, with good detail rendering and limited noise
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7 – Slightly low target exposure and pleasant skintone rendering, with visible noise
BEST 169
Portrait

The Razr Fold camera is a great option for portraiture. Portrait mode delivers a natural-looking bokeh effect, with good subject isolation and reliable edge detection. Colors and skin tones remain consistent as well. Overall, the camera provides a reliable and consistent portrait experience.

BEST 159
Zoom

Tele zoom performance is impressive for a foldable device. The dedicated 3x tele camera with periscope design captures good detail and nice colors. The texture/noise trade-off is solid and transitions between the primary, ultra-wide, and tele camera modules are smooth in photo mode, allowing for easy framing across a range of focal lengths. Overall, zoom is one of the Razr Fold’s standout photo features.

Motorola Razr Fold - equivalent tele (3×)
Good level of detail
Honor Magic V5 - equivalent tele (3×)
Good detail but loss of very fine detail
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7 - equivalent tele (3×)
Loss of detail

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

Motorola Razr Fold Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

Photo

169

Motorola Razr Fold

180

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, landscape and zoom photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

175

Motorola Razr Fold

184

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Motorola Razr Fold Photo scores
The photo Main tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses at 1x.

The Razr Fold delivers good exposure and a wide dynamic range in most conditions. White balance is accurate and colors are nice. Detail levels are generally high and image noise is well under control, but some artifacts, for example color fringing or ringing, can be noticeable in difficult scenes. The autofocus system works swiftly and accurately, and the wide depth of field helps keeping all subjects sharp in group shots. Overall, the Razr Fold camera is capable, especially when considering the foldable form factor, but not without its occasional quirks.

Exposure
132

Motorola Razr Fold

134

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

Exposure is reliable across light conditions, without over- or underexposure in most scenes. HDR processing is managed effectively, maintaining good highlight and shadow detail alike. However, in high-contrast or backlit scenes, noise and minor artifacts can creep in.

Motorola Razr Fold – Accurate exposure and pleasant contrast
Honor Magic V5 – Accurate exposure and pleasant contrast
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7 – Slightly low exposure and limited contrast
Color
132

Motorola Razr Fold

133

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Color is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Motorola Razr Fold – Accurate white balance and nice skin tones, with slightly low contrast
Honor Magic V5 – Very slight cast and nice skin tones
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7 – Slight green cast affecting skin tones rendering
Sharpness & Timing
122

Motorola Razr Fold

135

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Sharpness & Timing tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Diana setup: 10000Lux Δ0EV D55 Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 10000 Lux with D55 illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Autofocus irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Eugene setup: 5Lux Δ9EV 2700K Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 5 Lux with LED 2700K illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. On this scenario, the backlit panels in the scene are set up to simulate a fairly high dynamic range: the luminance ratio between the brightest point and a 18% reflective gray patch is 9, which we denote by a Exposure Value difference of 9. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Motorola Razr Fold
Extended depth of focus with very fine detail on both models

 

Honor Magic V5
Limited depth of focus with loss of detail on one model

 

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7
Extended depth of focus with good detail on both models and visible noise

 

Texture
126

Motorola Razr Fold

132

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for handheld conditions
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Noise
128

Motorola Razr Fold

129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Artifacts
74

Motorola Razr Fold

81

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main photo artifacts penalties

Bokeh

165

Motorola Razr Fold

180

Vivo X300 Pro
i

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

Tele

153

Motorola Razr Fold

170

Vivo X300 Pro
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

Motorola Razr Fold Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

When shooting with the 3x periscope tele camera, the Razr Fold records good fine detail and keeps noise levels low. Exposure is good, with natural colors across the tele zoom range. Up to an approximate tele zoom factor of 3x the camera uses digital zoom with the 50MP primary camera, which can result in a slight loss of very fine detail. At 3x the periscope tele module engages and textures look crisper, with cleaner edges. White balance remains neutral through mid‑range tele. Overall, the Razr Fold offers a coherent tele shooting experience for a foldable device, making good use of its dedicated 50MP tele camera.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
Motorola Razr Fold - 70mm equivalent tele (~ 3×)
Motorola Razr Fold - Very fine detail preserved

 

 

 

 

 

Honor Magic V5 - 70mm equivalent tele (~ 3×)
Honor Magic V5 - fine detail preserved

 

 

 

 

 

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7 - 70mm equivalent tele (~ 3×)
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7 - Loss of very fine detail

 

 

 

 

 

UltraWide

161

Motorola Razr Fold

169

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

Motorola Razr Fold Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Video

154

Motorola Razr Fold

172

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

In video mode the Razr Fold offers 4K resolution at 60fps and 8K at 30fps. Our tests were conducted at 4K/60fps, which overall offers the best balance of image quality and stability. The camera does generally well in video mode, with accurate exposure, a wide dynamic range and pleasant color rendering in most situations. Noise is well under control in good light, but can become more intrusive in difficult outdoor scenes. The autofocus is responsive most of the time, but can lag in low light. Our testers also noticed some exposure stepping during quick lighting changes. Artifacts like ghosting on moving subjects and occasional color quantization are noticeable but not overly disruptive.

Main

168

Motorola Razr Fold

186

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Motorola Razr Fold Video scores
Video Main tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.
Exposure
115

Motorola Razr Fold

133

Vivo X300 Pro
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

Motorola Razr Fold – Good exposure, dynamic range and contrast

Honor Magic V5 – Good exposure, dynamic range and contrast

Samgung Galaxy Z Fold7 – Good exposure, dynamic range and contrast
Color
129

Motorola Razr Fold

131

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Motorola Razr Fold – Pleasant white balance and skin tone rendering

Honor Magic V5 – Slight cast and nice skin tone rendering

Samgung Galaxy Z Fold7 – Slight cast and nice skin tone rendering
Sharpness & Timing
106

Motorola Razr Fold

124

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
i

For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.

Motorola Razr Fold – Good focus tracking

Motorola Signature – Good focus tracking

Oppo Find X8 Ultra – Good focus tracking
Texture
110

Motorola Razr Fold

118

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Noise
112

Motorola Razr Fold

129

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.
Stabilization
114

Motorola Razr Fold

124

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Motorola Razr Fold – Camera shake

Motorola Signature – Camera shake

Oppo Find X8 Ultra – Slight camera shake
Artifacts
87

Motorola Razr Fold

89

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main video artifacts penalties

UltraWide

148

Motorola Razr Fold

151

Motorola Signature
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Tele

103

Motorola Razr Fold

140

Vivo X200 Ultra
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Motorola Razr Fold – Good detail rendering with visible jump between camera modules

Motorola Signature – Good detail rendering with visible jump between camera modules

Oppo Find X8 Ultra – Good detail rendering with smooth transition and limited jump between camera modules

The post Motorola Razr Fold Camera Test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/motorola-razr-fold-camera-test/feed/ 0 solo_bridge_profile_PORTRAIT_Motorola Razr Fold solo_bar_lean_PORTRAIT_Motorola Razr Fold solo_bar_lean_PORTRAIT_Honor Magic V5 solo_bar_lean_PORTRAIT_Samsung Galaxy ZFold 7 duo_sunset_Motorola Razr Fold duo_sunset_Honor Magic V5 duo_sunset_Samsung Galaxy ZFold 7 solo_closeup_PORTRAIT_Motorola Razr Fold solo_closeup_PORTRAIT_Honor Magic V5 solo_closeup_PORTRAIT_Samsung Galaxy ZFold 7 Xiaomi 17 Ultra Camera Test https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-17-ultra-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-17-ultra-camera-test/#respond Wed, 11 Feb 2026 17:53:29 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=190454&preview=true&preview_id=190454 We put the Xiaomi 17 Ultra through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of [...]

The post Xiaomi 17 Ultra Camera Test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Xiaomi 17 Ultra through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50 MP, f/1.7, 23mm (wide)”, 1.6µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 50 MP, f/2.2, 14mm (ultrawide)”, 0.64µm
  • Tele: 200 MP, f/2.4-3.0, 75-100mm (telephoto)”, 0.56µm, PDAF, OIS, 3.2x-4.3x optical zoom

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.


Xiaomi 17 Ultra
166
camera
170
Photo
Main
171

184

Bokeh
175

180

Ultra-Wide
160

169

Tele
169

170

157
Video
Main
164

186

Ultra-Wide
144

151

Tele
132

140

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 169

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 185

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 180

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 149

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 159

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Very good trade-off between texture and noise, with the exception of low light video
  • Excellent tele zoom
  • Nice color rendering and accurate white balance in photo and video
  • Natural looking bokeh mode with very good subject isolation

Cons

  • Autofocus lack of smoothness in video, and depth of field is  very limited for group pictures
  • Exposure and white balance instabilities are occasionally visible

The Xiaomi 17 Ultra delivers an excellent performance in the DXOMARK Camera tests. In many test areas it is a significant upgrade over its predecessor 15 Ultra and is getting close to the very best flagship devices on the market –  without quite matching them, however. Photo performance is particularly impressive. Overall photo results are strong but the camera really shines when using the tele zoom or capturing portrait images.

Video performance is not quite on the same high level. Results are good but the when capturing moving images the Xiaomi 17 Ultra lags slightly behind the best-in-class competitors, still showing some issues that have been eliminated on class-leading video devices.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra – Excellent portrait shots
BEST 149
Lowlight

The Xiaomi 17 Ultra is an excellent photo performer in low light and delivers outstanding night shots with high levels of detail in most situations. This is not quite true for the video mode, where the phone falls short of expectations and stands as one of the weakest performers among this year’s flagship phones.

BEST 169
Portrait

The new Xiaomi flagship does not quite surpass the best in class but is still an outstanding option for portraiture, with excellent subject exposure, remarkably high levels of detail, even with moving subjects, and a very good bokeh mode.

BEST 159
Zoom

Zoom is one of the Xiaomi 17 Ultra’s strongest areas, particularly when it comes to tele zoom. Thanks to the powerful telephoto configuration, it ranks within the top three devices for this category, coming very close to the Huawei Pura 80 Ultra and the Vivo X200 Ultra, which occupy the top spots of the ranking.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

Photo

170

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

180

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, landscape and zoom photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

The Xiaomi 17 Ultra is an excellent smartphone for still imaging, thanks in part to the impressive camera specs, that include a large 1‑inch sensor in the primary module, a sliding 75‑100mm equivalent tele module with periscope design and a very large 200 MP sensor, as well as a 50MP ultra-wide camera. Additional components, such as PDAF, laser autofocus, ToF sensing, and a color spectrum sensor further support the capture pipeline.

Overall, the camera operates almost flawlessly in photo mode, with excellent performance across the entire focal range, from ultra-wide to long tele zoom. Our testers only noticed some focus‑related decision errors and the naturally limited depth of field.

The primary camera module excels in areas such as texture and noise. Night photography is a particular strength, but some small issues remain and prevent the Xiaomi from consistently reaching the very top of the category rankings. This includes occasional weaknesses at specific zoom settings, the handling of some artifacts, and some contrast inaccuracies in exposure rendering.

Main

171

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

184

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Xiaomi 17 Ultra Photo scores
The photo Main tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses at 1x.

The Xiaomi 17 Ultra delivers a strong overall performance in the DXOMARK Camera tests, with particularly high scores in the color, texture, and noise categories. Still images tend to be very bright, sometimes approaching the upper limit of acceptable exposure, yet dynamic range remains wide with good highlight retention. White balance is generally accurate across lighting conditions, but color rendering can occasionally appear slightly muted when viewing images on an HDR display. Texture performance is among the best we have seen. High levels of detail even on moving subjects make the Xiaomi an excellent choice for sports, pet, and family photography. Noise is extremely well controlled, but the aggressive noise reduction can introduce texture artifacts and quantization in areas of plain color.

Autofocus is the camera’s main weakness. It is fast in the, lab with almost no shutter lag, but in real-life scenes it often locks onto the second-closest subject to the camera instead of the closest one. The shallow depth of field limits sharpness of background subjects in group shots. In addition, the Super Macro mode does not provide sufficient magnification to achieve true macro results.

Exposure
128

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

134

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

Still image exposure is solid but lags slightly behind the best in class. The camera achieves a wide dynamic range and good highlight retention, even when shooting in low light. Images in general and skin tones specifically are among the brightest in the ultra premium segment, with high contrast levels. The bright skin tone rendering is also applied to dark skin tones, sometimes approaching the upper limit of acceptable exposure in our lab.

Contrast handling leaves some room for improvement, with overly strong local contrast in some landscape scenes, as well as contrast issues in backlit scenes, in both test laboratory and real-life scenes. In such conditions our testers often observed compressed highlight contrast and flare artifacts reducing shadow contrast, making for a slightly unnatural look of the image.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra – Accurately exposed face, good highlight retention in background
Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Slight underexposure on face
Apple iPhone 17Pro – Good face exposure
Color
131

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

133

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Color is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

The Xiaomi 17 Ultra does well for color. White balance is generally accurate in daylight and under typical indoor lighting. In low light images a slightly warm, but pleasant cast can be noticeable. Overall, color rendering is reliable, but in some scenes color can appear a little muted, especially under daylight and in low light.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra – Neutral white balance, nice skin tones
Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Accurate white balance
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Slight yellow color cast
Sharpness & Timing
112

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

135

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 100Lux Δ4EV TL84 Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Xiaomi 17 Ultra – Focus on background subject, limited depth of field for group shots
Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Focus on foreground subject, wider depth of field results in better detail on second subject
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Slightly limited depth of field
Texture
130

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

132

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for handheld conditions
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

The Xiaomi 17 Ultra is one of the very best devices for texture we have tested to date. High levels of fine detail are maintained across most light conditions. The camera’s ability to preserve sharpness on moving subjects is particularly impressive. This is clearly visible on our motion charts in the lab, and confirmed by real-life results.

Combined with the fast and reactive autofocus system, this makes the Xiaomi 17 Ultra an excellent option for shooting scenes with subjects in motion, for example sports, pets, or family moments with children.

One minor drawback is worth mentioning, though. While in low light the level of captured detail is mostly good, textures can look a little unnatural. Particularly moving subjects can look smoothed by noise reduction.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra - Detail and texture
Xiaomi 17 Ultra - Good detail
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Detail and texture
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Loss of detail
Noise
128

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

Noise is another one of the Xiaomi’s strong points. Like for texture, it is among the top two devices for this category. With only a few minor exceptions, noise is virtually absent in real-life scenes. However, the very aggressive noise reduction can have some subtle side effects. Slight texture artifacts can make an appearance, as well as some quantization in areas of plain color. Despite these minor issues, the overall noise performance remains excellent.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra - Noise
Xiaomi 17 Ultra - Pretty much free of noise
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Noise
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Pretty much free of noise
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Noise
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Some noise
Artifacts
75

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

81

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main photo artifacts penalties

Bokeh

175

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

180

Vivo X300 Pro
i

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

The Xiaomi 17 Ultra bokeh mode is among the very best we have seen to date. Subject segmentation in real-life scenes is particularly impressive, with highly accurate cutouts, even of very fine detail, such as hair. Background blur is strong and aesthetically pleasing, It is complemented by round, well-contrasted spotlight rendering that gives bokeh mode images a convincing optical depth-of-field effect.

Under controlled lab conditions segmentation is a little more inconsistent, with some failures in scenes with busy backgrounds. This is why the Xiaomi could not quite match the Vivo X300 Pro’s top score in this test category.

Default face beautification is worth mentioning as well. It is applied subtly and intelligently, preserving high levels of facial detail while smoothing blemishes. Unless you know the subject well, this is hardly noticeable, but in some situations, the processing can introduce minor color quantization. It appears in the form of small areas of plain color on the skin and makes skin texture look slightly unnatural in the affected areas.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra - Bokeh mode
Xiaomi 17 Ultra - Good segmentation of fine detail (hair), skin smoothing
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Bokeh mode
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Good segmentation but some fine hair strands are blurred
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Bokeh mode
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Good segmentation, slight lack of detail

Tele

169

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

170

Vivo X300 Pro
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

When tele-zooming, the Xiaomi 17 Ultra provides excellent zoom continuity, with good detail from the main camera all the way to extra‑long tele settings. Compared to the competition, detail is especially good at short and mid-range tele, between 35 and 75mm equivalent focal length, before the camera switches to the dedicated tele module. Detail is still good at long tele up to 200mm equivalent. Where the 17 Ultra falls slightly short of the best devices in the ultra premium segment is mid-range tele, from 85-150mm equivalent focal length.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
Xiaomi 17 Ultra - 2x tele zoom
Xiaomi 17 Ultra - Excellent detail
Huawei Pura 80 Ultra - 2x tele zoom
Huawei Pura 80 Ultra - Good detail
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - 2x tele zoom
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Loss of fine detail
Xiaomi 17 Ultra - Medium range tele
Xiaomi 17 Ultra - Slight loss of detail
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Medium range tele
Xiaomi 15 Ultra - Loss of detail
Vivo X300 Pro - Medium range tele
Vivo X300 Pro - Good detail

UltraWide

160

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

169

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

The wide camera module offers a shortest focal length close to 14mm equivalent. Performance is very solid, ranking the Xiaomi among the top five devices for this category. The texture/noise trade-off is excellent in real-life scenes. Good exposure and color contribute to the overall good image quality and are in line with the primary camera output. This said, when zooming in on the ultra-wide camera just to the point before the primary takes over (around 18mm equivalent), there is a slight drop in detail which we did not observe on the best performing devices for ultra-wide.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
Xiaomi 17 Ultra – High levels of detail, nice colors
Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Loss of fine detail
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Slight loss of detail

Video

157

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

172

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

The Xiaomi 17 Ultra offers a wide range of video recording options, including up to 8K resolution and multiple frame‑rates at 4K. Dolby Vision HDR is available at 4K/60fps. Our tests were conducted at 4K/60fps with Dolby HDR, as these settings offered the best overall balance between exposure, color accuracy, and stabilization.

At these settings, video performance is solid and dependable. Target exposure is generally accurate, with a fairly wide dynamic range in most daylight and indoor scenes. Color rendering is usually stable and reliable, offering natural‑looking hues and consistent skin‑tones. The camera also delivers a strong texture/noise trade-off, with good texture preservation and well‑controlled noise.

The imaging hardware, in combination with the Leica‑tuned processing, provides clean results, but overall video performance still lags slightly behind the iPhone 17 Pro and the best Android devices. For example, stepping can be noticeable in autofocus transitions, face tracking is occasionally lost and exposure and white‑balance transitions can be slightly unstable, especially with sudden changes in lighting. Thanks to the 200MP periscope tele module, accurate color and good detail are maintained during zooming, but transitions between modules are noticeable.

Main

164

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

186

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Xiaomi 17 Ultra Video scores
Video Main tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.
Exposure
123

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

133

Vivo X300 Pro
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

Video exposure is generally reliable, with accurate target exposure in most scenes and a fairly wide dynamic range that preserves highlight and shadow detail alike. Occasional exposure instabilities with sudden changes in the scene or lighting can be noticeable. Overall brightness is well controlled, but temporal flicker can appear under challenging mixed lighting.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra – Good exposure and wide dynamic range.

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Slight overexposure, highlight clipping

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Good exposure and wide dynamic range
Color
115

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

131

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Color rendering in video mode is usually stable and dependable, with natural‑looking hues and consistent skin tones in outdoor and indoor conditions. White balance is mostly accurate but can drift when lighting changes abruptly, resulting in short‑lived color casts before correction. This said, in general use, color rendering remains pleasing and coherent.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra – Slight white balance transition issues, nice color rendering

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Slight white balance transition issues, nice color rendering

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Slight white balance transition issues, nice color rendering
Sharpness & Timing
104

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

124

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
i

For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.

Autofocus accuracy is good, but stepping can be noticeable during transitions between subjects. Focus lock can be lost momentarily during face tracking, especially with moving subjects or sudden changes in focus distance. On the plus side, static scenes are rendered sharply.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra – Subject mostly in focus, slight loss of focus when getting closer

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Subject in focus, slight loss of focus when getting closer

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Subject always in focus
Texture
111

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

118

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

Detail rendition in video is a strong point of the 17 Ultra. Fine textures are preserved well in both outdoor and indoor scenes. The camera avoids excessive sharpening halos, keeping edges natural while maintaining clarity. Low light detail is competitive, but slight softening can occur to prevent noise amplification.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Noise
116

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

129

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Noise is overall well controlled, remaining low at mid‑to‑bright light levels and only increasing modestly under typical indoor lighting. In low light, some luminance noise is noticeable in areas of plain color, but temporal noise filtering keeps it from becoming too intrusive. Chroma noise is rare and generally unobtrusive.

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.
Stabilization
108

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

124

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Video stabilization is effective when walking and panning during recording. Framing is stable and camera shake within acceptable limits. This said, fast motion or abrupt stops can introduce micro‑jitter. Overall though, stabilization allows for confident handheld use without major artifacts.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra – Camera shake

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Camera shake

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Very good stabilization
Artifacts
87

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

89

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main video artifacts penalties

UltraWide

144

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

151

Motorola Signature
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Tele

132

Xiaomi 17 Ultra

140

Vivo X200 Ultra
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

The Xiaomi 17 Ultra does well when zooming in video mode. Color rendering remains accurate and detail holds up well as you move through the zoom range, helped by the dedicated tele module. This said, transition smoothness still lags behind the best in class. There are noticeable jumps when switching between camera modules and our testers observed occasional exposure or white‑balance stepping.

Medium‑range zoom settings deliver the overall most consistent results. At the long end of the tele stabilization and noise control remain competent but not class‑leading, and fine textures can show mild smoothing. Overall, zoom footage is very usable and coherent, but seamless ramps and cross‑module consistency have room for improvement.

Xiaomi 17 Ultra – Good detail with video zoom, slight jump between camera modules

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Good detail with video zoom, slight jump between camera modules

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Good detail in video zoom , smooth transitions

The post Xiaomi 17 Ultra Camera Test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-17-ultra-camera-test/feed/ 0 Girls_SacreCoeur_Main (1)_Xiaomi17Ultra PortraitWellWestHDR_Xiaomi17Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 PortraitWellWestHDR_Xiaomi15Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 PortraitWellWestHDR_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark_05-00 BushWindow_Xiaomi17Ultra_DxOMark_04-00 BushWindow_Xiaomi15ultra_DxOMark_05-00 BushWindow_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark_05-00 BoysBand_Xiaomi17Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 BoysBand_Xiaomi15ultra_DxOMark_05-00 BoysBand_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark_05-00 Girls_BlueDoor_Ultrawide (1)_Xiaomi17Ultra Girls_BlueDoor_Ultrawide (1) Girls_BlueDoor_Ultrawide (1)_AppleiPhone17ProMax Xiaomi 17 Pro Max Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-17-pro-max-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-17-pro-max-camera-test/#respond Wed, 28 Jan 2026 09:07:22 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=190165&preview=true&preview_id=190165 We put the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results [...]

The post Xiaomi 17 Pro Max Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50MP 1/1.28″ sensor, 2.4µm pixels, 23mm equivalent f/1.67-aperture lens, dual pixel PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 50MP 1/2.88″ sensor, 0.61µm pixels, 17mm equivalent f/2.4-aperture lens
  • Tele: 50MP 1/1.95″ sensor, 0.8µm pixels, 115mm equivalent f/2.6-aperture lens, PDAF, OIS

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.


Xiaomi 17 Pro Max
159
camera
165
Photo
Main
176

184

Bokeh
160

180

Ultra-Wide
106

169

Tele
148

170

146
Video
Main
155

186

Ultra-Wide
111

151

Tele
115

140

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 169

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 185

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 180

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 149

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 159

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Accurate white balance and nice colors
  • Good detail and texture/noise trade-off in still images
  • Generally fast and accurate autofocus

Cons

  • Video stabilization could be better, camera shake, even when standing still during recording
  • White balance and exposure instabilities, as well as transition issues in video mode
  • Noise in low light video
  • 17mm ultra-wide camera’s field of view more limited than on direct competitors

With the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max, Xiaomi makes its ambition to rival the iPhone 17 Pro Max clear not only in name, but also in imaging performance. This strategy largely succeeds in Photo, where the device scores just one point below Apple’s flagship. The slight deficit is mainly due to zoom limitations, stemming from the ultra-wide camera’s constrained 17mm focal length, which reduces flexibility at shorter zoom ranges.

That said, the Xiaomi’s primary camera slightly outperforms the iPhone’s, delivering consistently accurate exposure, pleasing color rendering, and an excellent texture/noise trade-off. Noise is particularly well controlled, often surpassing Apple’s performance in challenging scenes. While the ultra-wide’s field of view is somewhat limited, image quality remains good within its usable range, and the dedicated 5x tele camera provides solid, dependable results across all tested tele zoom settings.

Video is where the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max falls behind the iPhone and other top-tier flagships. White balance transitions can be abrupt or inconsistent, autofocus reliability is uneven, and visible noise appears in the shadow areas of the frame and when recording low-light scenes. In addition, video texture rendering is relatively low for a device positioned at the very top end of the market.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max – Pleasant overall rendering, with accurate target exposure and colors
BEST 149
Lowlight

When shooting photos in low light, the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max delivers a very good performance across a wide range of use cases, including portrait mode and tele zoom. Image detail is very good while noise levels are well under control, resulting in pleasing detail, even under difficult light conditions. Target exposure is generally good. While our testers observed slight underexposure in some portrait scenes, this rarely had a significant impact on overall image quality. The Xiaomi’s main issues in low light photography are exposure consistency and color. Some exposure instabilities can be noticeable across a series of consecutive shots, and under warm artificial light our experts sometimes noticed an orange cast in non-portrait scenes.

Low light video is more of a struggle for the 17 Pro Max. While footage is exposed well and texture levels are reasonable, noise can become very intrusive, especially in the shadow areas. In addition, color management issues are more evident in video, with unstable white balance and inaccurate skin tone rendering. These issues prevent the Xiaomi from matching the best-in-class flagship smartphone cameras in low light video scenes.

BEST 169
Portrait

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max portrait images are excellent. The camera is getting all the basics right, and skin tone rendering and face detail are outstanding. Autofocus is fast, but in some scenes our testers noticed a short delay after pressing the shutter button. Depth of field is slightly limited, which means that in group portraits, subjects towards the back of the scene can appear out of focus. The dedicated portrait mode maintains these image characteristics and applies a simulated bokeh effect. In bokeh mode, subject isolation is mostly good, but in some more complex scenes, with multiple objects at different distances from the camera, our experts noticed some depth estimation inaccuracies.

BEST 159
Zoom

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

Photo

165

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

180

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, landscape and zoom photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

176

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

184

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max Photo scores
The photo Main tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses at 1x.

The Xiaomi 17 Pro Max’s primary camera is one of the best we have tested to date for photo capture and in our photo ranking, is only surpassed by the last two generations of Huawei Pura devices. Image quality is overall highly consistent and competitive, with particular strengths in color rendering and texture/noise management.

Color performance is a highlight among the photo tests, thanks to a consistently accurate and pleasant white balance in most shooting conditions and well-rendered skin tones across a wide range of complexions. Color remains well controlled in low light, with only rare deviations that are generally down to exposure behavior rather than color processing. The Xiaomi’s trade-off between texture preservation and noise reduction is among the best we have seen. Image detail is crisp, defined well and rendered very naturally, even in low light. There is barely any noise in most daylight and indoor scenes. It becomes only slightly more noticeable at lower light levels. This means fine textures are rendered nicely, without any aggressive noise reduction artifacts.

The autofocus system is fast and accurate in most situations, contributing to a high keeper rate. The somewhat limited depth of field can result in slight sharpness falloff on subjects positioned further back in group portraits, but this is true for many current flagship phones and does not significantly detract from the overall experience.

Where the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max lags slightly behind the very best competitors is exposure performance. While target exposure is mostly correct, we observed some instabilities across consecutive shots. As a result, multiple captures may be necessary to ensure the desired rendering. In addition, our testers noticed occasional issues with contrast, as well as slight underexposure, particularly in high-contrast scenes and with subjects with with darker skin tones.

Exposure
129

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

134

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

Target exposure is accurate in most scenes, but not always consistent, with some instabilities across series of consecutive shots. In addition, contrast and exposure tuning are not always optimal in difficult high-contrast scenes, particularly with darker skin tones in the frame. In low light, exposure can look slightly darker than on competing flagship phones, when images are viewed on an HDR display.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max – Accurate face exposure, wide dynamic range
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Accurate exposure and wide dynamic range, but slight highlight clipping
Honor Magic 8 Pro – Accurate exposure and wide dynamic range, some face areas and lights almost clipped
Color
133

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

Best

i

Color is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Overall photo color performance is outstanding. White balance is generally accurate and pleasant, making for natural and appealing images. Excellent skin tone rendering provides good fidelity across a wide range of complexions. However, in some scenes without human subjects and under low artificial light, our testers occasionally noticed an orange cast. In addition, dark skin tones can sometimes appear slightly desaturated and unnatural, but this effect is more often linked to minor exposure inaccuracies rather than color processing alone.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max – Nice white balance and color rendering
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Nice white balance and color rendering
Honor Magic 8 Pro – Nice color rendering but slight white balance cast
Sharpness & Timing
117

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

135

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

Sharpness and Timing: irregularity and speed: 5Lux Δ0EV Tungsten Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Sharpness and Timing: irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Diana setup: 10000Lux Δ0EV D55 Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 10000 Lux with D55 illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, the higher the JOD is the more details are visible on the face. And the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Sharpness and Timing: irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Eugene setup: 5Lux Δ0EV 2700K Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 5 Lux with LED 2700K illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max - Depth of field
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max - Background subject slightly out of focus, with AI sharpening applied to the eyes
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Depth of field
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Background subject slightly out of focus
Honor Magic 8 Pro - Depth of field
Honor Magic 8 Pro - Background model slightly out of focus, with AI sharpening applied to the eyes and face
Texture
130

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

132

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for handheld conditions
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Noise
129

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

Best

i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

The Xiaomi 17 Pro Max is among the best devices in its class in terms of texture and noise. Noise levels are very low, matching those of the latest flagship devices with similarly strong light-collection capabilities, such as the Honor Magic 8 Pro, the Vivo X300 Pro or the Oppo Find X9 Pro. Noise only becomes noticeable in the shadow areas of high dynamic range scenes, or in extreme low light conditions. The camera’s ability to preserve fine textures while keeping noise levels low is truly outstanding. Detail remains crisp and natural, even in low light. If any AI-based detail reconstruction is applied, it is done so very carefully, enhancing detail without making it look artificial.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max - Texture and noise
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max - High levels of detail, natural rendering, no noise
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Texture and noise
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - High levels of detail on textured areas, slight noise
Honor Magic 8 Pro - Texture and noise
Honor Magic 8 Pro - High levels of detail, slightly unnatural rendering, no noise
Artifacts
78

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

81

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main photo artifacts penalties

Bokeh

160

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

180

Vivo X300 Pro
i

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

In bokeh mode the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max produces good portrait images, that come with generally accurate depth estimation and clean subject segmentation in real-life scenes. Edge detection is well handled in most situations, with only occasional minor errors around complex shapes. Depth estimation becomes less reliable in scenes with multiple subjects at different distances from the camera or with very busy backgrounds, such as our laboratory setups. Other bokeh attributes are managed well. Spotlights in the background are rendered with a nice shape and good contrast. Blur intensity is sufficiently strong to create a convincing background separation. Overall, bokeh performance is comparable to the iPhone 17 Pro, but trails slightly behind the best-in-class devices, such as the Vivo X300 Pro or the Honor Magic 8 Pro.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max - Bokeh mode
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max - Generally accurate segmentation, but artifacts on fine details, such as the hair
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Bokeh mode
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Generally accurate segmentation, but artifacts on fine detail such as the hair
Honor Magic 8 Pro - Bokeh mode
Honor Magic 8 Pro - Accurate segmentation

Tele

148

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

170

Vivo X300 Pro
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

With its 5x optical tele module, the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max offers the longest native focal length among current flagship devices, most of which are limited to 3x to 3.5x factors. Its longer tele lens allows the Xiaomi to stand out, particularly at longer zoom settings, where optical capture can provide clear benefits. This said, some limitations become apparent at medium tele zoom, where the camera relies on cropping the primary camera image. At these settings detail preservation is therefore lower than on competing devices that already use the dedicated tele camera at medium range. After the switch to the 5x tele, image quality improves noticeably, with sharper rendering and better textures, allowing the Xiaomi to catch up with its peers.

At longer zoom ranges, where cropping of the the tele camera image is necessary, the Xiaomi, like many of its rivals, relies on AI-powered processing to enhance fine detail. While this approach helps recover structure, its effectiveness is somewhat limited. Detail rendering can look unnatural, especially in portrait shots, where textures can appear uneven and slightly artificial.

Exposure and color rendering are generally well controlled and reliable across the zoom range, ensuring consistently pleasant results in most conditions. Overall, the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max delivers a competent and versatile tele zoom experience. While medium range detail and AI rendering at long tele settings leave some room for refinement, the Xiaomi is overall competitive in the tele zoom category and offers clear advantages to those who frequently shoot at longer focal lengths.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max - Long range tele
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max - Good overall quality, high levels of detail
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Long range tele
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Slight loss of detail
Honor Magic 8 Pro - Long range tele
Honor Magic 8 Pro - Fairly good detail, slightly inaccurate color rendering

UltraWide

106

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

169

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

Images captured with the Xiaomi’s ultra-wide camera are generally crisp and bright. Overall, the camera captures good levels of detail while noise levels are kept low. Color rendering is generally pleasant and target exposure is usually accurate. However, with an equivalent focal length of 17mm, the field of view is narrower than on the ultra-wide cameras of the competition.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max – Slightly more limited field of view than competitors, good overall image quality, slightly warm white balance
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Wider field of view, good overall image quality
Honor Magic 8 Pro – Wider field of view, good overall image quality, slightly cold white balance

Video

146

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

172

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

While in photo mode the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max can fully live up to its flagship ambitions, its video capabilities lag somewhat behind the best-in-class devices, such as Apple’s iPhone 17 Pro Max. That said, the device delivers a solid and competitive video experience, particularly when recording in good light.

Video exposure is outstanding, with the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max sharing the top spot in this category with the Vivo X300 Pro. Target exposure is accurate, and the camera captures a wide dynamic range, preserving detail in both highlights and shadows. This means the Xiaomi is ideal for outdoor recording, where results are consistently pleasing. However, some limitations become noticeable in more difficult light conditions. In lower light and in mixed lighting scenes, noise becomes more intrusive and unstable white balance transitions can lead to inconsistent color rendering. These issues become more pronounced at the light gets dimmer. Noise levels increase further and skin tones can take on a less natural appearance.

Video autofocus usually works well when recording static scenes, but can struggle with tracking moving subjects, sometimes hesitating to lock onto the correct target. In addition, video stabilization falls slightly behind what is typically expected from a flagship device, with camera shake remaining noticeable, even when standing still during recording.

Overall, the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max delivers a good video performance with excellent exposure and dynamic range in bright conditions, but it still has some room for improvement in low light. Autofocus tracking, and stabilization also need some improvement to allow the Xiaomi to truly compete with the very best video-centric smartphones.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max – Overall accurate target exposure and color

Main

155

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

186

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Xiaomi 17 Pro Max Video scores
Video Main tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.
Exposure
133

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

Best

i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Color
91

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

131

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max – Accurate color, but slight white balance instabilities

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Accurate color, stable white balance

Honor Magic 8 Pro – Accurate colors, but slight white balance instabilities
Sharpness & Timing
102

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

124

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
i

For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max – Slight refocusing during tracking

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Accurate focus during tracking

Honor Magic 8 Pro – Accurate focus during tracking
Texture
111

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

118

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Noise
103

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

129

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max – Slight loss of detail and noise

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Slight loss of detail, noise well under control

Honor Magic 8 Pro – Loss of detail, noise
Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.
Stabilization
112

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

124

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max – Camera shake, even when standing still during recording

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Smooth footage

Honor Magic 8 Pro – Frame shift during panning
Artifacts
83

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

89

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main video artifacts penalties

UltraWide

111

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

151

Motorola Signature
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Tele

115

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

140

Vivo X200 Ultra
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Xiaomi 17 Pro Max

Apple iPhone 17 Pro

Honor Magic 8 Pro

The post Xiaomi 17 Pro Max Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-17-pro-max-camera-test/feed/ 0 TrioPontNeuf_main_Xiaomi17ProMax ArtOnTablet_Xiaomi17ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 ArtOnTablet_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark_05-00 ArtOnTablet_HonorMagic8Pro_DxOMark_05-00 Best DuoBridgeLocks_main_Xiaomi17ProMax DuoBridgeLocks_main_ApplePhone17Pro DuoBridgeLocks_main_HonorMagic8Pro Best WideDefault_WellWestPortrait_Xiaomi17ProMax_DxOMark_05-00 WideDefault_WellWestPortrait_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark_05-00 WideDefault_WellWestPortrait_HonorMagic8Pro_DxOMark_05-00 Best Oppo Find X9 Pro Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/oppo-find-x9-pro-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/oppo-find-x9-pro-camera-test/#respond Thu, 15 Jan 2026 13:30:05 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=189866&preview=true&preview_id=189866 We put the Oppo Find X9 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results [...]

The post Oppo Find X9 Pro Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Oppo Find X9 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50MP 1/2.8″ sensor, 1.22µm pixels, 23mm equivalent f/1.5-aperture lens, multi-directional PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 50MP 1/2.76″ sensor, 0.64µm pixels, 16mm equivalent f/2-aperture lens
  • Tele: 200MP 1/1.56″ sensor, 0.5µm pixels, 70mm equivalent f/2.1-aperture lens, multi-directional PDAF, OIS

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Oppo Find X9 Pro
Oppo Find X9 Pro
166
camera
169
Photo
Main
174

184

Bokeh
170

180

Ultra-Wide
151

169

Tele
158

170

159
Video
Main
166

186

Ultra-Wide
148

151

Tele
131

140

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 169

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 185

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 180

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 149

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 159

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Very good exposure and dynamic range in photo and videos, even in low light
  • Generally neutral white balance and accurate skin tones
  • Very effective video stabilization, even when moving during recording
  • High levels of captured detail in photo and video

Cons

  • Video autofocus failures, incorrect target lock and overshooting during subject tracking
  • Video noise, even when recording in bright light
  • Slightly slower photo autofocus than direct competitors

Overall, the Oppo Find X9 Pro delivers a strong and well-balanced performance in the DXOMARK Camera tests, earning itself a spot in the top ten of our ranking. Very good photo results are characterized by accurate exposure, a wide dynamic range, nice color rendering, and a very good texture-to-noise compromise across most light conditions. Autofocus is generally reliable, and the high-resolution telephoto camera provides solid tele zoom capabilities.

The ultra-wide camera delivers consistent color and exposure, but has a more limited field of view than some competitors, and some loss of fine detail is noticeable. In video mode, the device produces well-exposed and detailed footage with effective stabilization and natural colors, but noise and autofocus tracking limitations, particularly in low light, prevent it from matching the most consistent performers in the ultra-premium segment. Overall, while not without limitations, the Oppo Find X9 Pro offers a capable and versatile camera experience that will satisfy the needs of most high-end users.

Oppo Find X9 Pro – Nice skin tones and accurate target exposure
BEST 149
Lowlight

In low light, the Oppo Find X9 Pro delivers generally usable video results, with accurate subject exposure in most scenes. Thanks to HDR processing, the camera captures a relatively wide dynamic range, retaining some highlight and shadow detail, even under dim lighting. Low light color rendering is nice, with a mostly neutral white balance and natural-looking skin tones. This said, slight color shifts can occasionally occur under complex artificial lighting conditions.

Image noise also becomes quite intrusive as light levels drop. In videos both spatial and temporal noise are visible on areas of plain color, and more noticeable than on competing devices, such as the Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max or the Honor Magic 8 Pro. Detail remains acceptable, but fine textures are partially smeared by noise reduction, especially in scenes with motion. Video autofocus becomes less stable in low light, with occasional focus hunting or delayed reaction when subjects move in the scene or when the camera-to-subject distance changes. Overall, the Oppo Find X9 Pro produces decent low light video, but noise and autofocus inconsistencies limit its performance when compared to the best-in-class devices.

Oppo Find X9 Pro – Good target exposure and wide dynamic range even in lowlight conditions. Colors and white balance are accurate.
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Dynamic range is slight more limited on this scene.
Honor Magic 8 Pro – Good dynamic range, but contrast and local contrast are are less natural.
BEST 169
Portrait

In portrait mode, the Oppo Find X9 Pro produces generally nice images, with accurate exposure and natural-looking skin tones. Subject isolation is reliable overall, with a nice background blur and a realistic simulation of the bokeh effect. However, in more complex scenes, minor depth estimation errors can appear, resulting in blur artifacts on fine detail, such as hair or glasses. While portrait results are suitable for most use cases, these artifacts prevent the Oppo Find X9 Pro from matching the best devices in this category.

Oppo Find X9 Pro – On this portrait, skin tones and contrast are accurate, and dynamic range is wide.
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – White balance is slight more yellow but it is still natural.
Honor Magic 8 Pro – Color details are slightly less visible than on the Oppo find X9 Pro.
BEST 159
Zoom

The Oppo Find X9 Pro delivers a generally good zoom performance, with consistent exposure and color rendering, from the ultra-wide camera all across to the 200MP telephoto module. The primary camera module provides solid image quality at short tele zoom settings, while the high-resolution 3x telephoto captures good levels of detail at its native focal length. At longer focal lengths beyond a 3x tele ratio, the 200MP sensor still delivers satisfactory results, although fine detail can be partially lost and sharpening artifacts can be noticeable. In addition, our testers noticed some inconsistencies in low light. Overall, zoom performance remains slightly behind the most consistent competitors in this category.

Oppo Find X9 Pro – At medium range zoom, the level of details is high.
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – On this scene, face details are less visible than on Oppe Find X9 Pro.
Honor Magic 8 Pro – high level of details on this scene.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

Oppo Find X9 Pro Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

Photo

169

Oppo Find X9 Pro

180

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, landscape and zoom photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Overall, the Oppo Find X9 Pro delivers strong photo results across a wide range of shooting conditions. Exposure is generally accurate, with a wide dynamic range and stable color rendering, resulting in natural-looking images in both indoor and outdoor scenes. The camera achieves a very good balance between detail preservation and noise control, while autofocus remains reliable in most situations. Tele zoom and ultra-wide performances are solid and consistent, offering good versatility, although some limitations in fine detail rendering and occasional artifacts can be observed. Overall, the Oppo Find X9 Pro provides a capable and well-rounded photographic experience, even if it does not consistently match the highest-performing devices in the ultra-premium segment.

Main

174

Oppo Find X9 Pro

184

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Oppo Find X9 Pro Photo scores
The photo Main tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses at 1x.
Exposure
131

Oppo Find X9 Pro

134

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

The Oppo Find X9 Pro achieves very good exposure accuracy across all test conditions. Target exposure is generally good, with faces and key subjects correctly exposed in both indoor and outdoor scenes. Thanks to the primary module’s large sensor and effective HDR processing, the Oppo captures a wide dynamic range, preserving highlight and shadow details even in high-contrast scenes.

In very low light, some rare instances of underexposure were observed, particularly under artificial lighting. Additionally, in strongly backlit portrait scenarios, a slight lack of contrast can sometimes affect subject rendering, resulting in flatter-looking faces when compared to competitors such as the Honor Magic 8 Pro.

Oppo Find X9 Pro – On this indoor conditions scene, target exposure is accurate, and color cast and skin tones are pleasant.
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – slightly lower target exposure and a slight bluish cast.
Honor Magic 8 Pro – exposure is accurate, but yellow white balance is slightly visible.
Color
131

Oppo Find X9 Pro

133

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Color is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

White balance is generally neutral and stable in most conditions. Skin tones are rendered nicely, with natural hues that compare favorably to both the iPhone 17 Pro Max and the Honor Magic 8 Pro. In daylight and under typical indoor lighting, color saturation is well controlled, avoiding excessive vibrancy while maintaining a natural look.

In some complex lighting situations, such as mixed indoor lighting or strong artificial light sources, minor white balance shifts can be observed, but these remain well within acceptable limits for a flagship device.

Sharpness & Timing
117

Oppo Find X9 Pro

135

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 20Lux Δ4EV Tungsten Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

Autofocus performance is generally accurate and reliable. The camera locks focus quickly in good light, and focus accuracy is high across repeated shots. In difficult low-light scenes, occasional autofocus failures were observed, and focus acquisition can be slightly slower than on competing devices, such as the iPhone 17 Pro Max.

Despite these limitations, focus stability remains good in most everyday scenarios.

Oppo Find X9 Pro, slight focus failure is visible on the scene.
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Subject is in focus.
Honor Magic 8 Pro - Subject is in focus.
Texture
127

Oppo Find X9 Pro

132

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for handheld conditions
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

The Oppo Find X9 Pro offers a very good compromise between texture preservation and noise reduction. Fine detail is rendered well in daylight and indoor scenes, with natural textures on faces and fabrics. Compared to the iPhone 17 Pro Max, the Oppo preserves slightly more fine detail in static scenes, though at the cost of marginally higher noise levels.

In low-light conditions, noise is generally well controlled, with limited chroma noise and acceptable luminance noise. Detail retention remains strong as well.

Oppo Find X9 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Honor Magic 8 Pro
Noise
128

Oppo Find X9 Pro

129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Oppo Find X9 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Honor Magic 8 Pro
Artifacts
75

Oppo Find X9 Pro

81

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main photo artifacts penalties
Close-Up

In close-up scenes, the Honor Magic 8 Pro delivers good image quality, with generally high levels of detail, nice colors, and accurate target exposure. While it does not allow the same close focusing distance as the Apple iPhone 17 Pro, performance is solid overall for this use case.

Oppo Find X9 Pro – at very close distance, the level of texture is high but finer details are lost in comparison to the Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – In macro tests the device reveals finer details thanks to a shorter minimum focusing distance.
Honor Magic 8 Pro – the level of detail is low. Although the minimum focusing distance is short, fine details are lost.

Bokeh

170

Oppo Find X9 Pro

180

Vivo X300 Pro
i

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

The Oppo Find X9 Pro’s portrait mode produces a generally convincing bokeh effect, with good subject isolation and natural-looking background blur. Depth estimation is accurate in most cases, even around complex shapes such as hair.

However, blur artifacts can be noticeable on fine details, particularly around glasses, hair strands, or intricate patterns.

Oppo Find X9 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Honor Magic 8 Pro

Tele

158

Oppo Find X9 Pro

170

Vivo X300 Pro
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

Oppo Find X9 Pro Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

The Oppo Find X9 Pro’s telephoto camera, designed around a 200MP sensor and periscope lens, delivers good image quality across a range of tele zoom settings. At its native 3x focal length, the camera captures high levels of detail, with accurate exposure and consistent color rendering. At longer focal lengths, the high sensor resolution helps maintain satisfactory image quality, although fine details can be partially smoothed and some sharpening artifacts may become visible. In low-light conditions, performance remains usable but less consistent, with a slight drop in detail and occasional noise, preventing the telephoto camera from reaching the level of the most reliable competitors.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
Oppo Find X9 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Honor Magic 8 Pro

UltraWide

151

Oppo Find X9 Pro

169

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

Oppo Find X9 Pro Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

The ultra-wide camera of the Oppo Find X9 Pro offers a 16mm equivalent field of view (measured in our lab), which in comparison to the direct competition, is fairly limited. Exposure is generally well managed, with a wide dynamic range and color rendering that remains consistent with the primary camera, resulting in good color continuity when switching between modules. Noise levels are well controlled in most lighting conditions. However, fine detail is noticeably reduced compared to the primary camera module. The overall level of detail is acceptable but ringing artifacts, particularly along high-contrast edges, are noticeable. In addition, chromatic aberrations can be observed at the shortest focal length, especially toward the edges of the frame.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
Oppo Find X9 Pro – At minimal focale, exposure is accurate and color are pleasant. The level of details is slightly limited.
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Colors are natural, but finer details are lost and luminance noise is visible.
 Honor Magic 8 Pro – the level on details is high.

Video

159

Oppo Find X9 Pro

172

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

The Oppo Find X9 Pro was tested in video mode at 4K resolution and 30 frames per second with HDR enabled. Overall, the device delivers a solid video performance across most tested conditions, with good exposure accuracy, a wide dynamic range, and pleasant color rendering. The combination of 10-bit HDR capture, Dolby Vision support, and effective video stabilization allows the camera to produce consistent and visually appealing footage in both indoor and outdoor environments. This said, while detail levels are high, some limitations were observed in terms of noise and autofocus tracking, particularly in more challenging scenes. As a result, the Oppo Find X9 Pro does not always reach the same level of consistency as the best performers in the ultra-premium segment.

Main

166

Oppo Find X9 Pro

186

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Oppo Find X9 Pro Video scores
Video Main tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.
Exposure
122

Oppo Find X9 Pro

133

Vivo X300 Pro
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

In video mode, the Oppo Find X9 Pro delivers well-exposed footage in most lighting conditions. Subjects remain correctly exposed even in low light, and dynamic range is wide, preserving highlight detail in high-contrast scenes.

Some exposure instabilities are sometimes noticeable with subjects moving within the frame, which causes an unpleasant effect. These instabilities are more noticeable than on the iPhone 17 Pro Max, which handles exposure transitions more smoothly.

Oppo Find X9 Pro – During motion in the scene, face exposure is slightly instable.

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Face exposure is mostly stable and accurate.

Honor Magic 8 Pro – Face exposure is mostly stable and accurate.
Color
127

Oppo Find X9 Pro

131

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Color rendering in video mode is pleasant and consistent across all test conditions. White balance is generally stable, with natural skin tones and realistic color saturation. The 10-bit HDR processing helps preserve subtle color gradients, particularly in skies, skin tones and vivid colors.

Oppo Find X9 Pro

Apple iPhone 17 Pro

Honor Magic 8 Pro
Sharpness & Timing
97

Oppo Find X9 Pro

124

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
i

For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.

Autofocus in video is fast and responsive in static scenes, but tracking performance is not on par with the best competitors in low light. When subjects move toward or away from the camera, focus can be lost. In addition, focus transitions are slightly too abrupt, making for an unnatural effect.

These limitations can affect usability in low light scenes with a lot of motion, for example when vlogging or with moving subjects.

Texture
114

Oppo Find X9 Pro

118

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

The level of detail in video footage is high, particularly in daylight recording. However, noise can be observed even in bright lighting conditions, especially in  areas of plain color, such as skies or walls. Noise is more pronounced than on both the iPhone 17 Pro Max and the Honor Magic 8 Pro.

In low light, both spatial and temporal noise become noticeable, though detail remains acceptable.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Noise
107

Oppo Find X9 Pro

129

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

Unlike other devices in the same price segment, the Oppo Find X9 Pro exhibits visible temporal noise in areas of plain color, even in bright light. In low-light scenes, noise levels are more in line with competing devices, delivering comparable results overall.

Oppo Find X9 Pro – On homogeneous areas luminance noise is visible, even in bright light conditions.

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Noise is very limited in bright light conditions.

Honor Magic 8 Pro – Noise is very limited in bright light conditions.
Stabilization
121

Oppo Find X9 Pro

124

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Video stabilization is very effective, delivering smooth footage when holding the camera still and when walking during recording. Camera shake is well controlled, and residual motion is minimal. Stabilization performance is comparable to the best devices in this segment.

Oppo Find X9 Pro – Goog motion reduction during walk and run movements.

Honor Magic 8 Pro – Residual abrupt motions are sitll visible during walk and run.
Artifacts
81

Oppo Find X9 Pro

89

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main video artifacts penalties

UltraWide

148

Oppo Find X9 Pro

151

Motorola Signature
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Tele

131

Oppo Find X9 Pro

140

Vivo X200 Ultra
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Oppo Find X9 Pro

Apple iPhone 17 Pro

Honor Magic 8 Pro

The post Oppo Find X9 Pro Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/oppo-find-x9-pro-camera-test/feed/ 0 Oppo Find X9 Pro BoysXmasTrees_main (1) 080_OppoFindX9Pro_DxOMark 080_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark 080_HonorMagic8Pro_DxOMark 120 (4)_ref 120_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark 120_HonorMagic8Pro_DxOMark MarcaudBridgeLocks_ZoomMedium_v2 (3) MarcaudBridgeLocks_ZoomMedium_v2 (1)_AppleiPhone17Pro MarcaudBridgeLocks_ZoomMedium_v1 (3)_HonorMagic8Pro BoysCafeIndoor_main (2) BoysCafeIndoor_main (1)_AppleiPhone17Pro BoysCafeIndoor_main (2)_HonorMagic8Pro 7400 (3)_ref 7400_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark 7400_HonorMagic8Pro_DxOMark 1620 (4)_ref 1620_AppleiPhone17Pro_DxOMark 1620_HonorMagic8Pro_DxOMark Xiaomi 15T Pro Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-15t-pro-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-15t-pro-camera-test/#respond Mon, 12 Jan 2026 13:48:43 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=189638&preview=true&preview_id=189638 We put the Xiaomi 15T Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of [...]

The post Xiaomi 15T Pro Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Xiaomi 15T Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50 MP, f/1.62, 23mm (wide), 1/1.31″, 2.4µm, multi-directional PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 12 MP, f/2.2, 15mm, 120˚ (ultrawide)
  • Tele: 50 MP, f/3.0, 115mm (telephoto), OIS, 5x optical zoom

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.


Xiaomi 15T Pro
149
camera
152
Photo
Main
157

184

Bokeh
160

180

Ultra-Wide
147

169

Tele
135

170

144
Video
Main
152

186

Ultra-Wide
139

151

Tele
112

140

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 169

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 185

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 180

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 149

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 159

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Accurate and stable Autofocus
  • Generally accurate target exposure in outdoor and indoor conditions
  • Generally well preserved details in photo

Cons

  • Inaccurate skintones in some situations and visible white balance casts in lowlight conditions.
  • Lost details and visible noise especially in lower light conditions in video and tele
  • Contrast can be low in backlit conditions in photo

The Xiaomi 15T Pro arrives as a compelling contender in the premium segment, offering an ambitious camera system backed by Leica’s optics and computational photography features. While its overall DXOMARK Camera score trails that of the Xiaomi 15 Ultra by approximately 10 points, it still offers an interesting balance of strengths and compromises. Its triple camera configuration enables broad photographic versatility from wide to significant optical zoom, although it is not up to the Xiaomi 15 Ultra which benefits from a quad-camera setup larger sensors that help boost detail and dynamic range.

For users seeking a well-rounded shooter with zoom flexibility and confident performance across most situations, the Xiaomi 15T Pro is a very capable choice, with accurate targeting exposure and autofocus as significant assets. While strong in many everyday conditions, it stumbles in nuanced areas like color fidelity, lowlight noise control, and contrast in high dynamic range scenes.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

Xiaomi 15T Pro Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

Photo

152

Xiaomi 15T Pro

180

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, landscape and zoom photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

In photo default mode, the Xiaomi 15T Pro is a rather trustable device. In favorable conditions, like outdoor and indoor conditions, it delivers high quality images with accurate target exposure and decent texture noise compromise. It comes with its drawbacks, especially in backlit conditions where contrast can be low on faces and deep skintone rendering can be unnatural. Going into lowlight conditions, orange white balance casts are visible. Autofocus is accurate and repeatable, although depth of field can be limited for group pictures with the second person being out of focus. Few artifacts are visible, mostly ghosting and fusion artifacts can be visible when there is movement.

Main

157

Xiaomi 15T Pro

184

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Xiaomi 15T Pro Photo scores
The photo Main tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses at 1x.
Exposure
113

Xiaomi 15T Pro

134

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Color
114

Xiaomi 15T Pro

133

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Exposure and color are the key attributes for technically good pictures. For exposure, the main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.
For color, the image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Xiaomi 15T Pro – Accurate target exposure, slightly inaccurate skintone rendering
Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Accurate target exposure and pleasant skintone rendering
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Accurate target exposure, slightly low contrast and slightly inaccurate skintone rendering
Sharpness & Timing
122

Xiaomi 15T Pro

135

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

Edge acutance irregularity and average shooting delay along all tested conditions
This graph illustrates focus irregularity and speed as well as zero shutter lag capability, for different light conditions. Each point is the result of the aggregation of the measurements for a group of 30 pictures per conditions. The y-axis shows the average acutance difference with the best focus in percentage. The lower the better. On the x-axis, a negative delay means the photo is taken just before the user triggers the shutter, a positive delay means the photo is taken just after. The closer to 0 ms, the better. Acutance and delay are measured respectively using the Dead leaves chart and the LED Universal Timer, on the AF HDR Setup.
Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Texture
123

Xiaomi 15T Pro

132

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for handheld conditions
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Noise
121

Xiaomi 15T Pro

129

Oppo Find X8 Ultra
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Artifacts
73

Xiaomi 15T Pro

81

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main photo artifacts penalties

Bokeh

160

Xiaomi 15T Pro

180

Vivo X300 Pro
i

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

In bokeh mode, blur simulation and depth estimation is descent, but behind what flagships can do. Using a equivalent focal length of 46mm via a numerical zoom, level of details is low on faces compared for example to the Xiaomi 15 Ultra which uses its short tele module for Bokeh mode.

Xiaomi 15T Pro
Xiaomi 15 Ultra
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

Tele

135

Xiaomi 15T Pro

170

Vivo X300 Pro
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

Xiaomi 15T Pro Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

UltraWide

147

Xiaomi 15T Pro

169

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

Xiaomi 15T Pro Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Video

144

Xiaomi 15T Pro

172

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

The Xiaomi 15T Pro video mode offers a range of resolution and frame rate settings, up to 8K/30fps and 4K/120fps. Dolby Vision 10-bit HDR recording is available at 4K/60fps and at 1080p resolution settings. The DXOMARK video tests were performed at 4K/30fps with Dolby Vision HDR, which provided the overall best results with image stabilization.

With these settings, the Xiaomi 15T Pro is actually a decent choice for its segment, offering a good overall video quality, which earns it a similar score to the Xiaomi 15 Ultra. The 15T Pro gains on the 15 Ultra with a more accurate autofocus in challenging situations (backlit and lowlight) and slightly less noise and noise artifacts for a similar level of texture. The 15T Pro offers a slightly lower target exposure while still being accurate, gaining in bright preservation compared to the 15 Ultra. However the 15T Pro lacks in stability and smoothness while adapting to changing conditions. Colors are a bit off, particularly with redish skintones in outdoor conditions and visible orange white balance casts in lowlight conditions.

Main

152

Xiaomi 15T Pro

186

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Xiaomi 15T Pro Video scores
Video Main tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.
Exposure
95

Xiaomi 15T Pro

133

Vivo X300 Pro
Color
100

Xiaomi 15T Pro

131

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.
Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Xiaomi 15T Pro – Accurate target exposure, abrupt adaptation and inaccurate colors

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Accurate target exposure and smooth adaptation, pleasant color rendering

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Accurate target exposure and smooth adaptation, pleasant color rendering
Texture
112

Xiaomi 15T Pro

118

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Noise
112

Xiaomi 15T Pro

129

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.
Stabilization
107

Xiaomi 15T Pro

124

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Xiaomi 15T Pro – Residual motion and sharpness difference between frames visible

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – Residual motion and sharpness difference between frames visible

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – Residual motion and sharpness difference between frames visible
Artifacts
83

Xiaomi 15T Pro

89

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main video artifacts penalties

UltraWide

139

Xiaomi 15T Pro

151

Motorola Signature
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Tele

112

Xiaomi 15T Pro

140

Vivo X200 Ultra
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

Xiaomi 15T Pro – low quality at long range with residual motions visible

Xiaomi 15 Ultra – good detail preservation at long range; abrupt transitions between camera modules

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra – good detail preservation at long range; slightly abrupt transitions between camera modules

The post Xiaomi 15T Pro Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-15t-pro-camera-test/feed/ 0 GreyBuilding_Xiaomi15TPro_DxOMark_05-00 GreyBuilding_Xiaomi15Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 GreyBuilding_SamsungGalaxyS25Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 Motorola Signature Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/motorola-signature-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/motorola-signature-camera-test/#respond Wed, 07 Jan 2026 01:03:03 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=189509&preview=true&preview_id=189509 We put the Motorola Signature through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our [...]

The post Motorola Signature Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Motorola Signature through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50MP 1/1.28″ sensor, 1.22µm pixels, 24mm equivalent f/1.68-aperture lens, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 50MP 1/2.76″ sensor, 0.64µm pixels, 12mm equivalent f/2.06-aperture lens
  • Tele: 50MP 1/1.953″ sensor, 0.8µm pixels, 71mm equivalent f/2.48-aperture lens, OIS

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.


Motorola Signature
164
camera
170
Photo
Main
175

184

Bokeh
170

180

Ultra-Wide
161

169

Tele
153

170

154
Video
Main
169

186

Ultra-Wide
151

Best

Tele
102

140

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 169

Portrait

Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people

BEST 185

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 180

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 149

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 159

Zoom

Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)

Pros

  • Accurate exposure and wide dynamic range in photo and video
  • Neutral white balance and nice color in photo and video
  • Very good photos in very low light
  • Good depth estimation and nice skin tones in portrait mode
  • Fairly high levels of photo and video detail in most conditions
  • Very low image noise in photos

Cons

  • Occasional slight video exposure instabilities
  • Occasional noise in backlit scenes
  • Slight loss of fine detail at short tele (before camera switches to tele module)

Thanks to a very decent and well balanced performance in the DXOMARK Camera tests, the Motorola Signature earns itself a spot in the top ten of our ranking and shows that good image quality and camera performance are not incompatible with a very thin smartphone body.

In photo mode the Motorola Signature camera captures very pleasant images with good exposure and a wide dynamic range. White balance is generally neutral, resulting in nice and natural colors. When shooting with the primary camera module, the Motorola maintains an excellent trade-off between detail retention and noise reduction, resulting in clean, noise-free images with high levels of detail. In addition, a face detail recovery algorithm improves detail on background faces in group portrait shots. Overall, image quality is very good across all light levels, from daylight snapping down to very low light scenes. Even night shots are nicely rendered. When taking simulated bokeh pictures in portrait mode, subjects are isolated from the background with great precision.

Image quality and camera performance remain good after zooming in and switching to the Signature’s 3x tele module. Texture and noise remain nicely balanced and tele images offer good subject exposure and colors. Thanks to the very wide field of view and overall good ultra-wide results, the Motorola is also one of the best devices for capturing photos with the ultra-wide camera.

In video mode the Motorola Signature was tested with Dolby Vision, 4K resolution and a 60fps variable frame rate. At these settings the camera delivered overall very good video results, delivering good exposure, a wide dynamic range, pleasant colors and neutral wide balance, as well as good video detail.

Motorola Signature – Nice colors, natural skin tones and neutral white balance
BEST 149
Lowlight

In very low light, the Motorola Signature offers a very good photo performance. Subjects are nicely exposed and images show a good dynamic range. Colors are nice, with a neutral white balance. Image processing maintains a good compromise between texture retention and noise reduction, resulting in good detail and very low noise levels.

In video mode the Motorola Signature produces low light clips with good exposure and nice colors. Video noise reduction works quite well but a loss of fine detail is noticeable. Our testers also observed some exposure and/or noise reduction instabilities.

Motorola Signature – Good exposure and color rendering
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Good exposure, color quantization on the wall
Vivo X300 Pro – Good exposure, color quantization on the wall
BEST 169
Portrait

The Motorola Signature offers a very good portrait mode that uses the tele module and its equivalent focal length of 85mm. Subjects are nicely isolated from the background, thanks to good depth estimation across all light conditions. Skin tones are accurate, subject exposure is accurate and fine detail is preserved well.

Motorola Signature – 85mm equivalent focal length makes framing easier, very good depth estimation
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Shorter equivalent focal length results in less ideal portrait framing, very good depth estimation
Vivo X300 Pro – Nice exposure and color, 85mm equivalent focal length makes framing easier, very good depth estimation
BEST 159
Zoom

The Motorola camera also captures nice images when switching to the 3x tele module. Tele images feature good detail and low noise levels. This said, at tele zoom levels between 2 and 3x digital zoom is applied to the primary camera image, resulting in a lack of detail when compared to some competitors.

With a 13mm equivalent focal length, the Motorola Signature’s ultra-wide camera offers a wide field of view. Ultra-wide images are good, with accurate white balance and good subject exposure. Detail is nicely preserved while noise levels are kept very low, especially when shooting in daylight.

Motorola Signature - Tele
Motorola Signature - Good detail but loss of very fine detail
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Tele
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Loss of detail
Vivo X300 Pro - Tele
Vivo X300 Pro - Very fine detail well preserved, noticeable sharpening

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

Motorola Signature Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

Photo

170

Motorola Signature

180

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, landscape and zoom photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Main

175

Motorola Signature

184

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Motorola Signature Photo scores
The photo Main tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses at 1x.

The Motorola Signature captures very nice images in photo mode. Images are exposed nicely, with a wide dynamic range keeping shadow and highlight clipping to a minimum. Subject contrast is mostly nice but our testers noticed a slight lack of contrast in some backlit scenes. The camera produces natural skin tones and neutral white balance across all test conditions. Textures are nicely rendered and noise levels are kept very low, resulting in a very good texture/noise trade-off. Thanks to its detail recovery algorithm, the Motorola Signature is capable of offering a wide depth of field in group shots, with subjects at different shooting distances rendered sharp. Image artifacts are mostly well under control, but some ghosting on moving subjects and ringing can occasionally be noticeable.

Close-Up

The Motorola Signature switches automatically to macro mode, which uses the ultra-wide camera module, when getting close to a subject. In this mode the camera manages to capture good detail at the center of the frame, but a loss of detail is noticeable closer to the edges. Exposure and color are good.

Motorola Signature – Very good detail at the center of the frame, loss of detail at the edges
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Good detail at the center of the frame, loss of sharpness at the edges
Vivo X300 Pro – Very good detail
Exposure
131

Motorola Signature

134

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

Photo exposure is good across all conditions and a wide dynamic range ensures good highlight and shadow detail. Contrast on subjects in generally good, but can be lacking in some backlit scenes.

Motorola Signature – Good subject and background exposure, no shadow clipping
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Good subject exposure
Vivo X300 Pro – Good subject exposure
Color
130

Motorola Signature

133

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Color is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Motorola Signature images offer a neutral white balance across all light conditions, making for pleasantly natural skin tones in portrait shots.

Motorola Signature – Nice colors, natural skin tones and neutral white balance
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Very slight yellow cast
Vivo X300 Pro – Neutral white balance
Sharpness & Timing
123

Motorola Signature

135

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Sharpness & Timing tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

Sharpness and Timing: irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Diana setup: 10000Lux Δ0EV D55 Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 10000 Lux with D55 illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
Sharpness and Timing: irregularity and speed on AFHDR Portrait Eugene setup: 5Lux Δ0EV 2700K Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and zero shutter lag capability by showing the level of details on the face versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR Portrait setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 5 Lux with LED 2700K illuminant, 500 ms after the defocus. The level of details on the face is measured using DXOMARK Detail Preservation Metric on the Realistic Mannequin, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

Thanks to a combination of a wide optical depth of field and clever software processing, the Motorola Signature manages to keep multiple subjects in group shots in focus most of the time, even when they are placed at different distances from the camera. Compared to some competitors with similar software features, detail recovery often looks more natural because detail is not only enhanced on the background subject’s face, but also on the body. When this is not done, the difference in detail between face and body can be quite noticeable.

Motorola Signature - Depth of field
Motorola Signature - Good detail on background subject
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Depth of field
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max - Background subject out of focus
Oppo Find X8 Ultra - Depth of field
Oppo Find X8 Ultra - Good detail on background subject face (but loss of fine detail on clothing)
Texture
124

Motorola Signature

132

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for handheld conditions
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

The Motorola Signature captures naturally rendered fine detail in most test conditions. In low light some loss of fine detail is noticeable, but this is true for pretty much any phone camera. This said, when shooting in very low light, the Motorola Signature manages to maintain better levels of detail than many of its direct competitors.

Motorola Signature - Texture
Motorola Signature - Detail
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Texture
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Good detail
Vivo X300 Pro - Texture
Vivo X300 Pro - Very good detail
Noise
129

Motorola Signature

Best

i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

Thanks to very good noise reduction, noise levels are close to zero across all light conditions, making the Motorola Signature one of the best devices in our photo noise ranking.

Motorola Signature - Noise
Motorola Signature - Very well controlled noise, even in the shadows
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Noise
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Slight noise
Vivo X300 Pro - Noise
Vivo X300 Pro - Noise well under control
Artifacts
75

Motorola Signature

81

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main photo artifacts penalties

Bokeh

170

Motorola Signature

180

Vivo X300 Pro
i

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

In its portrait mode, the Motorola Signature delivers highly accurate depth estimation, making subject separation from the background very precise and isolating even individual hairs. Portrait Mode uses the 85mm equivalent tele camera, providing a natural background blur with nicely shaped and contrasted spotlights. Like in standard photo mode, images come with good fine detail and nice skin tones, making for overall excellent portrait images.

Motorola Signature - Bokeh mode
Motorola Signature - Good depth estimation, even on individual hairs
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Bokeh mode
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Good depth estimation
Vivo X300 Pro - Bokeh mode
Vivo X300 Pro - Very good depth estimation

Tele

153

Motorola Signature

170

Vivo X300 Pro
i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

Motorola Signature Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

When shooting with the 3x tele zoom camera module, the Motorola Signature delivers good detail and low noise levels. Up to a 3x tele ratio, the camera applies digital zoom to the primary camera image output, which results in a slight loss of detail. After the tele module takes over at 3x, fine detail is preserved well, target exposure is accurate and colors are nice, with a neutral white balance across all zoom settings.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
Motorola Signature - Tele zoom
Motorola Signature - Very good detail
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Tele zoom
Apple iPhone 17 Pro - Good detail
Vivo X300 Pro - Tele zoom
Vivo X300 Pro - Very good detail

UltraWide

161

Motorola Signature

169

Vivo X200 Ultra
i

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

Motorola Signature Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.

The Motorola Signature’s ultra-wide camera module offers a very wide 13mm equivalent focal length. Like on the primary module, exposure is good and colors are nice. Some slight color fringing can sometimes be noticeable, though.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
Motorola Signature – Wide field of view with good exposure and nice colors
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Good exposure
Vivo X300 Pro – Good exposure and nice colors

Video

154

Motorola Signature

172

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Like its competitors, the Motorola Signature offers a fairly wide range of video settings and modes. For our tests we used the 4K resolution with a 60fps adaptive frame rate and Dolby Vision 10-bit HDR, which delivered the overall best results. Video clips recorded with the device offer accurate target exposure and generally a wide dynamic range. White balance is pleasant and stable while color rendering remains natural across most light conditions. Detail levels are high and, thanks to a fast frame rate and effective stabilization, footage appears smooth and steady, even when moving during recording. However, our experts observed some slight exposure instabilities in various conditions. Noise can also be noticeable, even when recording in daylight, but particularly in backlit scenes. In some very rare cases, we also saw some minor autofocus inaccuracies.

Main

169

Motorola Signature

186

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Motorola Signature Video scores
Video Main tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.
Exposure
114

Motorola Signature

133

Vivo X300 Pro
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.

The Motorola Signature’s video mode offers a wide dynamic range and accurate target exposure in most test conditions. However, our testers also noticed some slight exposure adaptation issues in some scenes.

Motorola Signature – Good subject exposure, wide dynamic range

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Good subject exposure, wide dynamic range

Oppo Find X8 Ultra – Good subject exposure, wide dynamic range
Color
130

Motorola Signature

131

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Motorola Signature video clips come with a neutral and pleasant white balance. Color rendering is accurate, with natural skin tones.

Motorola Signature – Neutral white balance, natural skin tones

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Slight warm cast

Vivo X300 Ultra – Neutral white balance, natural skin tones
Sharpness & Timing
106

Motorola Signature

124

Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
i

For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.

Video autofocus performance is quite good. The autofocus is smooth and accurate in most situations, with reliable subject tracking, even in scenes with multiple subjects. This said, our experts observed some slight focus inaccuracies in some scenes.

Motorola Signature – Good focus tracking

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Good focus tracking

Vivo X300 Ultra – Good focus tracking
Texture
112

Motorola Signature

118

Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

In video mode the Motorola Signature is capable of maintaining fairly high levels of detail, as well as natural detail rendering, especially when recording in daylight or under typical indoor lighting. In low light, very fine detail can be lost, but this is also the case for most of the competition.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Noise
112

Motorola Signature

129

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Video noise is managed well in static scenes, but in low light or with motion in the scene, it can become more intrusive.

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.
Stabilization
114

Motorola Signature

124

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

The Motorola’s video stabilization does a good job at producing smooth video footage. However, compared to the best in class, such as the Apple iPhone 18 Pro, some camera shake remains noticeable.

Motorola Signature – Slight camera shake

Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Effective stabilization

Vivo X300 Ultra – Effective stabilization
Artifacts
88

Motorola Signature

89

Apple iPhone 17 Pro
i

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main video artifacts penalties

UltraWide

151

Motorola Signature

Best

i

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Tele

102

Motorola Signature

140

Vivo X200 Ultra
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Like for stills, the Motorola Signature’s ultra-wide camera module offers a very wide field of view in video mode. Target exposure is accurate and colors are nice in most recording conditions.

Motorola Signature – Wide field of view with ultra-wide module, smooth pinch zoom

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max – Smooth pinch zoom

Oppo Find X8 Ultra – Smooth pinch zoom

The post Motorola Signature Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/motorola-signature-camera-test/feed/ 0 Best m7_Motorola m11_Motorola m11_Apple m11_Vivo b6_Motorola b6_Apple b6_Vivo macro_Motorola macro_Apple macro_Vivo m12_Motorola m12_Apple m12_Vivo m7_Motorola m7_Apple m7_Vivo Best w4_Motorola w4_Apple w4_Vivo Best