Camera Comparison: Samsung's Galaxy S22 Ultra vs. Apple's iPhone 13 Pro Max

[The Game 161]

I do prefer my s22 ultra to the 13 pro max overall but both have their strengths and weaknesses camera wise. iPhone is certainly better for moving objects with faster shutter speed and better video. stills overall the Samsung produces better overall images with better night mode and overall better low light performance.

I prefer macro on the iPhone though.

 

[SamuelFleming]

Smartphone cameras are still tiny little garbage cameras that only impress people who are used to taking crappy photos to put on social media sites. They in NO way can compare to traditional cameras with 1” type sensor (or larger). A Sony RX100 (any model number) will blow these garbage cameras out of the water, and the small Sony RX100 will still be as useful 10 or even 15 years down the road. If you want a small, pocketable camera get a traditional camera, don’t buy an overpriced smartphone with a garbage camera. I love my iPhone 13 Pro Max, and the cameras are improved over the older iPhone XR I had, but the cameras are not why I bought it. The smartphone cameras are a frigging joke compared to traditional cameras, and they are difficult to use and the image quality is a D- at best. It is like comparing an old standard definition TV set to a 4K HDR TV, there is no comparison other than “crap” versus “good”.

You should be more specific about what you mean by crap. The average user will be more than happy with the results from these phones even up to an 8x10. In fact most people will be happy with them printing poster sized prints. Most people aren't artists or don't spend their time trying to sell their images.

I 100% understand if you need a DSLR there is no replacement, but as someone else noted, the camera that is with you will capture many images while the camera that isn't with you will never capture anything. Capturing a moment so I can have a memory with my iPhone is more than acceptable especially with the quality they have been achieving over the last several years.

 

[bluedesert]

100% agree with you. You will get slammed for this, but you are absolutely right. These people unfortunately will never understand this. It is too big of a bubble to burst.

Oh, geez. Here come the wannabe gatekeepers...

 

[jayducharme]

Would I like more optical zoom on an iPhone? Heck yes! For me, that's about the only area currently lacking.

 

[SamuelFleming]

Someone else mentioned it a

One should look at and compare the RAW pictures, the rest is a question of software.
Best might be to take the RAWs and apply the same adjustments in an editing SW

Watching the video I agree. If we want a true comparison of the hardware a different approach is required. What we were shown here is a comparison of a combination of hardware and some hard work done in software. I saw this most when the hat of the winter scene was compared and the details were noted, but then the baby pictures the detail was reversed. Different scenes will cause the software to change what it prioritizes.

 

[bluedesert]

Totally disagree with this. If you look at smart phone marketing, they totally are using the camera technology as leverage for the point of selling this to the consumer. This is one of the main reasons why consumers even upgrade the phone in the first place, is to have the latest camera. Look at any iPhone Keynote, you’ll see exactly what I’m talking about.

You're misunderstanding. Most people aren't thinking, "I need a camera, let me buy an iPhone". They're looking at the phone itself first and then seeing how the camera performs. It's a multipurpose device. The ones focusing (no pun intended) solely on the camera aspect understand this and it's why they're not meant to be on the same level as traditional cameras. Especially considering the form factor.

 

[SamuelFleming]

Would I like more optical zoom on an iPhone? Heck yes! For me, that's about the only area currently lacking.

The most interesting thing about current phone setups is that the general population is learning what pro photographers knew all along: A few prime lenses almost always is a better setup than a couple of zoom lenses. You seldom are stuck unable to frame the picture the way you want to (unless you run our of focal length on the long or wide end) and the pictures are better because the elements are designed specifically for the one focal length.

 

[GDF]

Apple really needs to step it up in the optical zoom department this year.

 

[Danfango]

You're misunderstanding. Most people aren't thinking, "I need a camera, let me buy an iPhone". They're looking at the phone itself first and then seeing how the camera performs. It's a multipurpose device. The ones focusing (no pun intended) solely on the camera aspect understand this and it's why they're not meant to be on the same level as traditional cameras. Especially considering the form factor.

Yeah and no. I actually bought my 13 Pro because of the camera first. I had a 12 before which was perfectly adequate and I wanted the incremental upgrade.

 

[dallegre]

I have an a7III and several grand worth of lenses, and I totally bought the iPhone13 pro because of the camera. Having ProRes video in one's pocket is pretty cool. I may be the only guy shooting 1080 24p ProRes on my phone, but I'm having fun doing it.

 

[alexe]

To me, the iPhone wins in every photo except the low-light photo, there the S22 clearly did the better job.

 

[alexe]

Samsung's looks better and it's quite obvious too.

I disagree, so it clearly isn't that obvious.

 

[PrecisionGem]

Huh? Nobody is talking about iPhones or Samsung phones taking on traditional cameras. Most people aren't buying phones because of the cameras, it's just a plus if they perform well for the form factor. As they say, the best camera is the one you have on you and pretty much everyone is gonna have a phone on them.

I think you are wrong. What are the biggest phone upgrades and most talked about features? It's the camera. Other than the camera, there isn't much different with the latest phone and one that is 5 years old or more.

 

[nastysailboat]

Samsung in February introduced its latest high-end flagship smartphone, the Galaxy S22 Ultra. We picked up one of the new Samsung devices, and thought we'd compare it to Apple's top-of-the-line smartphone, the iPhone 13 Pro Max, to see how the two premium phones compare to one another when it comes to camera quality.

Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos.​

The Galaxy S22 Ultra is equipped with four total cameras this year, including a 108-megapixel wide angle camera, a 12-megapixel ultra wide-angle camera, a 10-megapixel telephoto camera with 10x optical zoom, and a 10-megapixel camera with 3x optical zoom.

Comparatively, the iPhone 13 Pro Max has a 12-megapixel Wide lens, a 12-megapixel Ultra Wide lens, and a 12-megapixel Telephoto lens that supports 3x optical zoom. On paper, Samsung certainly wins out when it comes to raw specifications, especially in the optical zoom department.

In practice, though, both smartphones take incredible pictures and from photo to photo, it can be hard to pick a favorite as you can see in the photos from our video and from this article. Note that all of the photos we're showing were captured in RAW, and are straight out of the camera using the default settings of the smartphone, no edits involved.

You'll mainly see differences in color temperature, depending on the scene. The Galaxy S22 Ultra tends to have a cooler tone, while the iPhone 13 Pro Max is warmer. The S22 Ultra also tends to elevate highlights, and while it can sometimes appear sharper, some may find the images to be a bit too washed out because of it.

In some situations, the iPhone offers up more natural lighting for skin tones than the S22 Ultra, but the contrast that the iPhone uses can make dark areas darker, causing images to lose out on a touch of detail. The iPhone images tend to be more vibrant and can be more aesthetically pleasing, but it does really vary based on subject matter.

In Portrait Mode, there's a lot of similarity. Samsung has improved the edge detection and bokeh of its portrait photos, and both the iPhone 13 Pro Max and the S22 Ultra take great images. The iPhone is of course more vibrant, and in some images, it's a little sharper. Unfortunately, Samsung is still not great at skin tones and the S22 Ultra does not do as well at preserving skin texture.

When it comes to telephoto capabilities, the 10x optical zoom, the 30x digital zoom, and the 100x digital zoom offered by the S22 Ultra are leagues ahead of the iPhone with its 3x optical zoom and 15x digital zoom. 100x zoom is fun to see how close you can get, but even at 30x, you can get some fairly usable photos out of the S22 Ultra.

As for video recording, the iPhone has the edge because it supports Dolby Atmos and ProRes for higher-quality video for those who need it, but for everyday videos, both are more than adequate. Cinematic Mode is better than Samsung's Live Portrait video option because Samsung restricts the feature to faces only, and the iPhone also wins out when it comes to stabilization. The Galaxy S22 Ultra does support 8K video unlike the iPhone 13 Pro Max, but the lack of good stabilization affects the quality.

It's unlikely that most people are picking their smartphone based on the camera capabilities alone, and ecosystem plays a huge role. Someone who owns multiple Apple devices probably isn't going to go out and buy an S22 Ultra, nor is a regular Samsung owner likely to swap out of that ecosystem for an iPhone.

In day to day use, these smartphones are incredibly similar and really both take gorgeous, high-quality photos that rival those you can get with high-end point and shoot cameras, especially when lighting is good. What iPhone users can glean from the S22 Ultra is what we might see Apple do in the future. Will Apple rival that 10x optical zoom lens? Rumors say yes, because there's a periscope lens with greater zoom capabilities in the works, and Apple is always working to boost camera technology.

What did you think of the photos in the video? Make sure to give it a watch to see all of the comparisons, and then let us know whether you prefer the Galaxy S22 Ultra or the iPhone 13 Pro Max.

Article Link: Camera Comparison: Samsung's Galaxy S22 Ultra vs. Apple's iPhone 13 Pro Max

I get why people like the Samsung photos. They look like a good photo that’s color corrected. IMO the iPhone photos look more realistic to me. Although that’s the best night mode photo I’ve seen from the Samsungs more of them look like day from what I’ve seen.

 

[nastysailboat]

I think you are wrong. What are the biggest phone upgrades and most talked about features? It's the camera. Other than the camera, there isn't much different with the latest phone and one that is 5 years old or more.

I agree I think for the price they easily compete with the $3000 range dslr

 

[Stiksi]

One should look at and compare the RAW pictures, the rest is a question of software.
Best might be to take the RAWs and apply the same adjustments in an editing SW

They did shoot raw, it’s mentioned in the post. Apparently they still kept the WB as shot, which is fair in my opinion.

 

[Stromos]

Smartphone cameras are still tiny little garbage cameras that only impress people who are used to taking crappy photos to put on social media sites. They in NO way can compare to traditional cameras with 1” type sensor (or larger). A Sony RX100 (any model number) will blow these garbage cameras out of the water, and the small Sony RX100 will still be as useful 10 or even 15 years down the road. If you want a small, pocketable camera get a traditional camera, don’t buy an overpriced smartphone with a garbage camera. I love my iPhone 13 Pro Max, and the cameras are improved over the older iPhone XR I had, but the cameras are not why I bought it. The smartphone cameras are a frigging joke compared to traditional cameras, and they are difficult to use and the image quality is a D- at best. It is like comparing an old standard definition TV set to a 4K HDR TV, there is no comparison other than “crap” versus “good”.

A 1,299 dollar digital camera that's "pocketable" if you wear cargo shorts.

 

[wutqq]

Samsung has surpassed apple in terms of hardware.

This has been the case for years but in sensors this tiny, software is what really matters. Google pixel has proven this time and time again with very old hardware.

 

[mi7chy]

Still not a fan of Apple's yellowish skin tone and still scenery looks a little more depressing. As a package especially with the zoom I'd lean towards the S22 Ultra but it's not a huge upgrade over the S21 Ultra to justify buying a new phone.

 

[wutqq]

I’ll buy another Samsung if they throw a 1” or even m4/3 sensor on a THICC phone. Optical zoom isn’t enough to grab me and everything else is kind of a wash with both sides grabbing wins and losses.

 

[tridley68]

Apple still looks better hands down

 

[paulovsouza]

At this point it’s about lighting and focus. Both look great. I think why one looks a little better than the other is because of conditions that can’t be replicated. But I do think such an extreme zoom is complete unusable or necessary.

 

[jasonefmonk]

As for video recording, the iPhone has the edge because it supports Dolby Atmos and ProRes for higher-quality video for those who need it, but for everyday videos, both are more than adequate.

Dolby Vision.

The audio format is Dolby Atmos. The high dynamic range video format is Dolby Vision.

 

[oneMadRssn]

Smartphone cameras are still tiny little garbage cameras that only impress people who are used to taking crappy photos to put on social media sites. They in NO way can compare to traditional cameras with 1” type sensor (or larger). A Sony RX100 (any model number) will blow these garbage cameras out of the water, and the small Sony RX100 will still be as useful 10 or even 15 years down the road. If you want a small, pocketable camera get a traditional camera, don’t buy an overpriced smartphone with a garbage camera. I love my iPhone 13 Pro Max, and the cameras are improved over the older iPhone XR I had, but the cameras are not why I bought it. The smartphone cameras are a frigging joke compared to traditional cameras, and they are difficult to use and the image quality is a D- at best. It is like comparing an old standard definition TV set to a 4K HDR TV, there is no comparison other than “crap” versus “good”.

The Sony RX100 is $1300! And it does only one thing. For that much cash, I'd sure hope it's good.

The single most important feature that no other traditional camera has is being in my pocket every waking moment of every day. So I welcome any and all improvements to smartphone cameras because those changes actually impact my use more than anything else.

 

[gxxr]

I agree I think for the price they easily compete with the $3000 range dslr

So for the price it‘s quite good, or it competes with a dslr in the $3000 range? Which one is it?
(It doesn‘t compete with dslrs in the $3000 range, and it doesn‘t need to)