iPhone X vs. Galaxy S9+: Which Smartphone Has a Better Camera?

[Piggie]

Iphone pics in this article look better.
However the problem is, that's these THREE examples.

I've seen other pics where the iPhone X has blown out all the highlights and you still have nice detail in the Samsung image.

I guess examples picked to put on an Apple Forum, are going to pick the ones that show the Apple image as the better one.

They are both great, but I would have liked to have seen the Pixel2 along side these two for comparison.
[doublepost=1521277133][/doublepost]

Do people really prefer shooting 720p 960fps for 0.2 seconds over 1080p 240fps for as long as you want? It really seems not very useful to me.

There is no right answer to your question.

For some uses 240 fps would be the perfect speed
For other uses 960 fps (four times as fast) would be the perfect speed.

It's 100% dependent on what you wish to capture as an individual.

 

[waquzy]

Nobody care about a camera on a phone. It's a friggin phone for God's sake. If they marketed it as iCamera then maybe I would care.

https://www.amazon.com/Canon-EOS-1D-Camera-Safari-Bundle/dp/B077CH8HVC/ref=sr_1_1?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1521244052&sr=1-1&keywords=dslr+camera&refinements=p_72:1248879011,p_36:1000000-99999999 is what I use and carry with me all the time for a decent selfie or FB photo. I can't believe we are even discussing this,

Wrong. It is one of the main reasons for me when buying a new phone

 

[JungeQuex]

This smartphone camera race seems pointless. The point and shoot camera is mostly dead, but I can’t see smartphones ever replacing professional photography equipment.

With that being said, both the S9+ and iPhone X take good photos and the differences are only highlighted by pixel counters, who aren’t real photographers anyway.

 

[Piggie]

I am the same.
The camera is one of my main uses for the phone.
Pretty much any iPhone or Android phone can run all your apps you want, so that's just a given.
Be it an app may open in a second or two less, but who cares.

A nice screen which is BIG enough for you is of course very important, but if you have a junk camera then, for me the phone would be no good. It's for recording information, and memories and a excellent tool.

Personally I've LOVE perhaps 4 or more sensors on the back.
One for macro/close up work.
One for telephoto long distance shots.
Other two perhaps to work together (one for colour, one for detail) to combine to give a superb image.

Many times you can't go back and re-capture a shot, what you have recorded is all you will every have, so makes sense for that to be the best it can possible be.

Don't believe me, then make 2 phones, and tell customers one has a better camera and show the benefits of the better one.
Price one at $900 and the other at $950 and see which one people choose.
[doublepost=1521280184][/doublepost]

This smartphone camera race seems pointless. The point and shoot camera is mostly dead, but I can’t see smartphones ever replacing professional photography equipment.

With that being said, both the S9+ and iPhone X take good photos and the differences are only highlighted by pixel counters, who aren’t real photographers anyway.

The two biggest failings now, are Macro and Telephoto.

You still need to clip bulky add-on's over a smartphone camera to achieve this.
Hence why I would like this added on as standard

 

[YaGaYaW]

Not sure if the labeling of these photos were switched in error based on your preference but the iPhone X photos are undoubtedly better. No photo is perfect and we will find faults on both cameras but in this case it's clear, IMO, X marks the spot.

 

[mrzz]

samsung image quality is better

 

[Heineken]

I am no professional photographer, but I enjoy photography as a hobby. Living in Scotland, I am confronted very often with situation in which the dynamic range of light in the picture is quite high (such as sunshine peaking through clouds). Thus, is it me, or does the iPhone X seem to overexpose light areas (saturating the affected pixels) because it does not have the necessary dynamic range (e.g., see light areas of clouds in image below)?

Maybe the sky actually looked like that?

 

[hamstation]

Hate to say but I like the X better, and I just bought the S9 guess I be trading with my son and get my X back

 

[Whathappened]

I would have been nice to have a third set of pictures taken with a professional DSLR to compare. Both pics look good, but we can't tell which one is closer to reality.

We can since it is mentioned in the text..

 

[maflynn]

Hate to say but I like the X better, and I just bought the S9 guess I be trading with my son and get my X back

I don't think the differences are that much, especially if you like the S9's other features.

This article seems to indicate the S9 beats out the X
Low Light Photo Shootout: Galaxy S9 Vs. iPhone X Vs. Note 8

Overall, I think the quality of images on all the cameras, you cannot go wrong with either one at this point, so it boils down to other features of the phone, do people like iOS better, or want an Android experience.

 

[gnipgnop]

I like the white point in the X photos better. There's a gray cast to most of those S9 photos.

 

[Heineken]

I don't think the differences are that much, especially if you like the S9's other features.

This article seems to indicate the S9 beats out the X
Low Light Photo Shootout: Galaxy S9 Vs. iPhone X Vs. Note 8

Overall, I think the quality of images on all the cameras, you cannot go wrong with either one at this point, so it boils down to other features of the phone, do people like iOS better, or want an Android experience.

Both cameras are great, the difference will be software based mainly and will depend on the environment too. At times there will be clear difference and at times images will be almost identical.

 

[[AUT] Thomas]

Should have made that a blind test... I'd bet probably 5% of the people could tell from which phone the pic came. The other 95% would most likely do a wild 50/50 guess.

That's how good smartphone photography has become.

 

[maflynn]

Should have made that a blind test.

Indeed, that's a great way to ensure bias isnt introduced.

 

[geta]

Based on these pictures there is no clear winner - both of the cameras are good, each one having edvantage in different situation.

 

[mixel]

They've been incredible for a few years. I wouldn't buy a phone over another just for its camera, but it does play a small part in the decision. It's great to see how advanced they are now though.

All the high end phones seem good enough, and you can easily avoid things like the blown out sky in that iphone X photo by using manual features available in 3rd party apps (that often allow raw shooting).

 

[friedmud]

It looks like the iPhone meters slightly brighter than the Samsung by default. That is “good” if you want a more immediately usable photo - but if you plan to do some editing it looks like the S9 will have a bit more “headroom” for alterations.

I do wish some more care with the metering would have been taken in this comparison to try to get more comparable results.

I love the camera on my iPhone X - but anytime I’m taking a “serious” picture I always lock in the AF and adjust the metering.

I used to lug huge Nikon DSLR gear with me all over the world. I actually just landed in Switzerland (still in the airport) for a week: and I didn’t even bring my DSLR with me. The iPhone X is THAT good. As long as you take some care with focus, metering and composition (just like with any camera!) it can produce some truly excellent photos. Plenty good enough for 9”x11” prints on my wall...

 

[0947347]

I still think that it heavily depends on photographer.
I am sure, if I would like to make S9 to look better than X then I would shoot that way and vice versa.

I would only trust a disinterested, ``emotionally unattached to a particular brand``, photographer, to do a comparison test.

Not saying the test here is biased, or anything. Just the fact this is an Apple oriented side can make it look biased.

 

[DNichter]

Because they're brighter. People are inclined to like brighter photos than ones that appear dim.

The last photo is a no-contest winner for the S9+. The buildings look like an oil painting on the iPhone. Apple needs to sort out that noise-reduction algorithm.
[doublepost=1521250002][/doublepost]

That's the job of the camera -- to take the highest quality image possible of what the lens sees.

You can always add all the romance you want post-production, which is what most photographers do.

Well whatever it is, I like the X photos better. Very surprising to me as I figured the S9+ should be a massive upgrade in that area.

 

[BODYBUILDERPAUL]

Neither. Pixel 2 still has the best overall camera with a single lens. It’s not so much about the hardware anymore it’s about improving the software.

Hint hint Apple: fix your buggy mess while you’re at it.

You talk about improving software and are talking about an Android phone in the same sentence. Are you serious???

 

[interessiert]

Apple must hurry not to be the ever second in hardware race of high level handies - the notch - Face ID without Touch ID (through display) - lightning instead of USB-C - and now SAMSUNG Galaxy S9(+) is the clear winner comparing to iPhone X and I guess also to its successor IMO.
Just iOS and chip technology is still an Apple field...

 

[TheTruth101]

Totally fake! I got my iPhone X and a friend showed me his Galaxy s9 and his pictures were way superior. Crispier and more defined color. We took pictures of the things on the table and it was way superior.

 

[soanis]

The last photo really shows my biggest complaint with iPhone photos that's been ongoing since iOS 7: the super aggressive noise-reduction that makes everything look like a painting.

Even in outdoors during the day, noise cancellation makes it all terribly blurry.

exactly this, very evident in the last photo, if you look at the building to the far right you can clearly see the blurred effect this has.

the S9+ has an albeit slight edge on the X, but this is a MR forum, hence the bias.

 

[magbarn]

The ability to capture many pixels without noise matters a lot in postprocessing. Many consumers need to crop their photos, and that makes the differences way more noticeable.

BTW, anyone who says a phone can take similar photos to a DSLR has not used a DSLR in the past 5 years. DSLRs have advanced accordingly. Nowadays, they can accurately capture twice the pixels as any phone and can preserve color in much lower light.

Some who "gets it." Actually you'd have to go back more than 10 yrs as my ancient D300/D700 DSLR's still kill any smartphone camera. These pics only look good as they've been resized and shrunk for a 1080p screen, but throw up any decent DSLR camera pic against these guys on a 4K screen or on print and the DSLR blows all these smartphone cameras away. The only way a DSLR comes close to these pics is if you get a D80 from 2006 and slap on some nasty superzoom like a 18-300mm lens on it.

 

[I7guy]

Iphone pics in this article look better.
However the problem is, that's these THREE examples.

I've seen other pics where the iPhone X has blown out all the highlights and you still have nice detail in the Samsung image.

I guess examples picked to put on an Apple Forum, are going to pick the ones that show the Apple image as the better one.

They are both great, but I would have liked to have seen the Pixel2 along side these two for comparison.
[doublepost=1521277133][/doublepost]

There is no right answer to your question.

For some uses 240 fps would be the perfect speed
For other uses 960 fps (four times as fast) would be the perfect speed.

It's 100% dependent on what you wish to capture as an individual.

I’ve seen examples in the past of color shifting and blown highlights. Has Samsung addressed theses issues?