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

[nerdo]

For phones these pictures are impressive, as photos compared to a real camera, both are complete garbage. The fact people think this is a debate is sad. Comparing these two to see who is the least digitally enhanced rubbish. Glad I got to see this and got another reminder of how bad phone pictures really are.

 

[no0nefamous]

For phones these pictures are impressive, as photos compared to a real camera, both are complete garbage. The fact people think this is a debate is sad. Comparing these two to see who is the least digitally enhanced rubbish. Glad I got to see this and got another reminder of how bad phone pictures really are.

The photos in the first post are not meant to be good photos by themselves. They're meant to compare the technical details.

 

[svenmany]

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.

Nah, they won't get slammed. They made good points. On the other hand, this post of yours should be slammed. You decided to insult some people reading and contributing to the thread. Good job. I can't even figure out who "These people" are. Does that include you and w5jck?

 

[falainber]

Both produce great results, you can’t go wrong with either. It’s all boils down to OS and the ecosystem, which do you prefer? I personally prefer iOS.

Does iOS have 30x zoom? 10x?

 

[phrehdd]

I left Apple a few years ago. I was frustrated with lack of screen customizing (not for fun but for my vision). I ended up jumping ship and went to a Samsung galaxy s8+ and later (now) a galaxy s10+. The s10+ is a decent performer and yes, I was with the 8+ and one app able to make my menu screens far easier to read (less icons and larger text, etc.).

Strangely, it seems that the iPhone 13pro and pro max's megapixels are similar to Samsung's 10+. I do like the photos I was getting from the Samsung and glad that the pro and pro max should be similar if not better. For the price, I would have hoped the iphone was a bit closer to the 22ultra in terms of lenses and 10x optical. I am really on the fence given that the widgets with iPhone may meet my needs for larger images on the menus and get me a nice re-entry into the eco system but then again, Samsung really does offer more on the photo side (not video just still images) if one isn't afraid to do post editing and possibly shoot raw. I could hold on until the iPhone 14 comes out and hope its upgrade to the camera is significant.

 

[phrehdd]

This is completely wrong and is just elitism.

The iPhone 13 Pro I have is an excellent camera. The only problem is it's missing a chunk of glass in front of it. I can mostly live without this. It also costs about the same as an RX100.

The key thing about photography to note is the camera matters at least an order of magnitude less than the photographer. If you put a Nikon Z9 in the hands of an average monkey and an iPhone in the hands of a photographer, the photographer is going to pull some decent shots. Comparing absolute specifications in completely pointless when the key thing is this is an ART.

Now I'm certainly not saying that the thing doesn't have some problems, but the compromises it makes are pretty damn good. I'm going to buy a mirrorless camera very soon, probably a Z50, but that's mostly a luxury purchase if I'm honest. I don't need it.

You can see some iPhone 13 Pro shots I took here on my "toy camera"...

https://imgur.com/a/nz21mSf

As for the actual topic itself, I don't like the S22 results here. The zoom is impressive but even at 3x on a smartphone it's very difficult to use because the grip isn't stable. The 13 pro wobbles around. At 10x this is going to be horrible and probably requires some stability such as a grip or tripod. Not only that, and I know this is mostly the post-processing the iPhone does, but the colours and dynamic range on the S22 don't seem quite right.

I would imagine for those interested in using these phones for more than snapshots might consider raw files which is an entirely different ballgame. Chances are both phones would do well with a hobbyist who more than dabbles in raw files.

For me, I believe I could get far more goodness out of either camera with raw post editing given my own photography background. One truth is that these images can pack a punch but overall, are not at the same level as a larger sensor camera. My days go back to film and multiple formats as well as digital with Fuji x cameras for hobby only.

 

[Darth Tulhu]

For phones these pictures are impressive, as photos compared to a real camera, both are complete garbage.

You win the Captain Obvious award, although "complete garbage" is nonsense. You'd have to quantify what the photo is for, before making such a wild-ass claim.

The fact people think this is a debate is sad.

Comparing two smartphone cameras as a decision point between purchasing one of those two devices is the definition of "informed reasoning".

Sad is to think that the debate is about anything else, when SIX pages of comments have already explained this to death.

Comparing these two to see who is the least digitally enhanced rubbish. Glad I got to see this and got another reminder of how bad phone pictures really are.

Well, good for you. Some people won't listen to music unless it's on their vinyl-based, tube-amp-driven, tens of thousands of dollars audiophile system. I just use my phone, streamed even, via AirPods.

For me (and I'd venture to say, most people), the phone picture quality matters much, MUCH LESS than WHAT'S been captured IN the photo or video.

I want a phone camera that will capture my MEMORIES, as accurately as possible for a device I have with me at basically ALL TIMES. It's a tool for REMEMBERING the events recorded. That's why it's on a smartphone.

Most smartphone camera users aren't trying to earn a living or make art with them (even if some can and do), so to publicly rage against this machine is just plain silly.

 

[TechRunner]

For me (and I'd venture to say, most people), the phone picture quality matters much, MUCH LESS than WHAT'S been captured IN the photo or video.

This. Think about the shaky video or poorly shot photo that news outlets pay thousands of dollars for just because someone happened to be in the right place at the right time. Quality is secondary to content. And like you said, most people don't have the technical expertise to discern a good photo from a great one. All they care about is seeing the subject matter.

 

[GoodWheaties]

I'd like to point out.. Android users still have a common issue with the photos regardless of how good cameras are to date. The social media software\platform when uploading and sharing. Even today Android apps compress the heck out of photos, MMS , RCS is awful. Even snap chat or facebook. horrible.

iPhone user's don't have a lot of these issues.

It’s not that Android apps are compressing the photos, it’s that they aren’t even using the actual camera software. They are simply taking a screenshot of what the camera is showing. My friend who was die-hard Android for several years just switched back to iPhone and he said the difference in photos from Snapchat, Instagram, etc. almost made him mad. And he wasn’t using garbage Android phones.

 

[Sincci]

it's an even match on a lot of those pictures. I like the s22 pictures.

only if Samsung had a FaceTime equivalent and there was some sort of iTunes software built for Samsung phones that you could install on a Mac or PC and listen, play and add music. Also a photo's app equivalent for Samsung phones.

Then I would not miss the Apple iPhone.

There's nothing samsung can do about facetime, but at least you can keep using itunes and just drag & drop music folders to any android phone and they'll work just fine. If you don't like the default music app, just get another one from play store (I personally use poweramp which isn't free, but it supports tons of nice features like external dacs and so on).

 

[MacAddict1978]

If people are honest and not fanboying out.... Samsung's camera always has and will best the iPhone. Look at the disparity in specs. Samsung literally R&Ds and makes the tech where as Apple buys their camera tech from companies like Samsung and uses software to compensate.

Both sets of pics look good, but the clarity and detail in the Samsung pics was better, but Samsung does a terrible job with software processing which is where Apple shines (night mode is all software but it usually looks great).

Apple's camera settings are absolutely awful and Samsung's are not and gives you 100X more options with your settings.

 

[MacAddict1978]

These comparisons irritate me! Whats the point in comparing last years 2021 iPhone to this years 2022 Samsung???

Wait 6 months for the iPhone 14 and compare that to this years S22! Make it a fair and valid comparison.

Apple's camera hardware has been several generations behind high end Android phones from the beginning. My Pro Max is 13MPs! 13!!!! The last Samsung camera that low was the base model S10.

I'll say it again, if Samsung's software sucks. Apple's software takes what should be terrible pictures in comparison and artificially makes them look good.... most of the time.

Imagine if Apple actually put modern hardware in their camera paired with their software, but they won't....they make more $$$ this way.

 

[no0nefamous]

Megapixels don't matter that much, especially with the small sensor sizes on phones. It's like how the phones -can- record 4K video, but you're not actually getting 4K detail, just an image that's been recorded at that resolution.

 

[phrehdd]

Megapixels don't matter that much, especially with the small sensor sizes on phones. It's like how the phones -can- record 4K video, but you're not actually getting 4K detail, just an image that's been recorded at that resolution.

I appreciate the logic you are using about these small sensor "cameras" within the smartphone but alas, pixels do help if the image is furthered by computer enhancement. Without the latter, a smaller sensor with a "fair" quality lens is not going to go too far. We know that both Apple and Android phone makers do use in phone enhancements.

 

[The Game 161]

These comparisons irritate me! Whats the point in comparing last years 2021 iPhone to this years 2022 Samsung???

Wait 6 months for the iPhone 14 and compare that to this years S22! Make it a fair and valid comparison.

What an awful statement

You do realise the s22 ultra is a response to the 13 pro max right? Why would you wait for the iPhone 14 pro exactly? By then the s22 ultra will be 7-8 months old. So again how is that fair using your poor logic?

 

[nicmart]

What technology has wrought: lousy photos on phones that cost as much as quite decent cameras. Dismal audio sound on tiny ear buds that cost as much as a very decent headphone. Tech media has done its job of convincing people that poor quality is sufficient.

 

[miq]

Salty fanboy? As an Engineer myself, I'm using pure logic! You compare like for like. So NEW 2022 MODEL for NEW 2022 MODEL. If you use logic, you will realise that both Apple and Samsing are BOTH releasing new phones in 2022. Think before you reply.

Right, and would you use the same ‘pure logic’ if Apple released their iPhone on January 1 each year and Samsung on December 31st?

 

[babyexercise]

Samsung has surpassed apple in terms of hardware.

Apple has much faster cpu. Samsung camera sensor is bigger but not big different.

 

[no0nefamous]

What technology has wrought: lousy photos on phones that cost as much as quite decent cameras. Dismal audio sound on tiny ear buds that cost as much as a very decent headphone. Tech media has done its job of convincing people that poor quality is sufficient.

I'd like to know what is driving so many of you to be this cynical about photos that are at least as good as the best point-and-shoot cameras, and often better, on a device that is not primarily a camera that you have on you at all times.

You're acting like we're still dealing with 00's era camera phones here.

Also, a phone costs as much as a dedicated camera because it does a lot more than a camera.

 

[jockmoron]

Interesting comparison - the warmth of the iPhone is just a tad exaggerated, and make the scene look a bit "muddy". I prefer the Samsung for scenery shots. But for portraits/family pics, the iPhone is much better. The skin tones are very good, and the phone deals with the darker face very well indeed. The difference in sharpness is not noticeable at normal viewing or on prints. As most folk use their phones to record themselves, their families, their colleagues, parties and pets, I think the iPhone would definitely be best. If you're recording your hiking trip in the mountains, safari etc, the Samsung, and because of the zoom and good colour out of the box. But if anyone is even very slightly competent with the photos apps, they can so easily be corrected afterwards that these comparisons really don't amount to too much. . Choose the right phone for your use on its OS, if you have a Mac, it has to be an iPhone, surely, and its other features and its price. I'd also go for an iPhone because they'll still be usable five or six years down the road. In reality I use a proper camera, Fuji X30, smallish sensor proper zoom lens, much nicer to handle than a phone, proper flash (really important) and eye level finder.

 

[drugdoubles]

Samsung even the best lastest flagship is infamous for lag between you click and the final image that is taken and also cannot focus on moving object at all. If you need to take photo for kid or moving object like a sport match or animal, that is a nightmare. Reviews like this cannot show these two killing weakness at all and I don’t think Samsung tries to solve at all.

iPhone or Pixel does much better job, but Pixel is famous for both hardware and software extremely not stable not mature, it is always like a lab testing object and you gamble what would happen everyday.

I am not an apple fan at all but I don’t have a choice for having stable fast focus photos with a phone.