Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Samsung Announces New Galaxy S23 Ultra With 200-Megapixel Camera
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I care, so you are literally wrong.
200 megapixels is great for seeing the person in the photo is using an iPhone Pro Max
Better looking? I guess I am biased but I think the iPhone pro max looks much better than the Samsung ultras.
Aside from that, I agree that many people here seem to trash them when they’re no where near trash. Samsung, Google, and Apple all have really solid phone options. Whichever is the best is definitely subjective and depends on what the users prefers.
Last edited:
That's the good take, even if you are not into Android/Samsung phones competition is good for everyone and forces the companies to improve and innovate. But sadly most of the comments here are just childish mocking and cheap jokes that bring nothing to the discussion
Unfortunately, that is a different line of products that is still used today. This is their S line, the line to attempt to compete with the iPhone.
They still have the gimmicky folding thing that makes 0 sense.
Remember you all. Competition is good.
Honestly, I am disappointed by the box design of the Ultra. It reminds me of those Sony phones. Why not keep the design of the regular one … looks much better in my opinion
Honestly, I am disappointed by the box design of the Ultra. It reminds me of those Sony phones. Why not keep the design of the regular one … looks much better in my opinion
Phone camera sensors are perfectly suitable for their intended purposes - snapshots. They’re good replacements for low-end point and shoot cameras and computational photography helps to overcome many of their shortcomings.
Am I going to just use my phone on vacation instead of my full frame mirrorless camera and high quality lenses? Of course not, but phones offer surprisingly good image quality for people who don’t want to spend hours futzing with sliders in Lightroom.
Everyone I know with a Fold loves it, so clearly they see sense in it you don't. I still don't get why I would ever want a Home Pod or Alexa or ANYTHING using an assistant type thing. Doesn't mean I'm ignorant enough to not see why OTHERS may.
What, just because I like and use Apple stuff I have to hate everything else and not even be interested what the competition is up to?
That's just ridiculous.
More recent devices? And how long ago?
Before I switched to the iPhone 13 I had an S10 to cheat on iOS for a bit when stuff got stagnant on this side and it treated me quite well for a couple of years. It pretty much acted like new apart from normal battery degradation but other Samsungs I’ve had (the ones before S6) were so so so bad.
Samsung’s copywriting has gotten so cringe, they really need to put the words ‘epic’ and ‘standard’ to rest. Literally made every possible combination of them to the point where it makes no sense. The devices are probably great but the way they do marketing puts me off and I’m pretty sure that’s the opposite of what it’s supposed to do lol
Seeing how salty comments are now on this site it will be really funny to see the level they will reach when camera comparisons will start to appear.
After seeing multiple hands-on videos, so quite a decent pool of opinions, 1 thing was common: S23 Ultra's camera is much improved vs its predecessor. One video where the presenter was really focused on the camera, said the photo and especially video capabilities are leaps and bonds above the S22 Ultra, video doesn't look anymore like it was shot on a phone, details are way more natural, the same about the photos, more natural textures and a less processed look, better light sensitivity so better control of the highlights and shadows. These are huge wins in my book. Anyway this year S23 series will be the best Samsung launched since the S10 the new SOC has great performance and efficiency and that will make a big difference. The guy that focused on the camera also talked about the thermal behavior of these new phones, he also tested them in games and with 8k video recording and in the same scenario the S22's would get really hot, well the S23's only got warm to the touch.
After seeing multiple hands-on videos, so quite a decent pool of opinions, 1 thing was common: S23 Ultra's camera is much improved vs its predecessor. One video where the presenter was really focused on the camera, said the photo and especially video capabilities are leaps and bonds above the S22 Ultra, video doesn't look anymore like it was shot on a phone, details are way more natural, the same about the photos, more natural textures and a less processed look, better light sensitivity so better control of the highlights and shadows. These are huge wins in my book. Anyway this year S23 series will be the best Samsung launched since the S10 the new SOC has great performance and efficiency and that will make a big difference. The guy that focused on the camera also talked about the thermal behavior of these new phones, he also tested them in games and with 8k video recording and in the same scenario the S22's would get really hot, well the S23's only got warm to the touch.
Last edited:
I love Apple stuff but most is too much past the iPhones, especially since you can get insane carrier deals. I might actually consider that Samsung Laptop posted on here since it is 1/2-1/3 the price for a 16" screen
Obviously your characteristics are non-dynamic. I
I had to go look up irons after your comment.
This is a real thing. They're all like this:
PurSteam Professional Grade 1800-Watt Steam Iron with Digital LCD Screen, 3-Way Auto-Off, Double-Layer Ceramic Soleplate, Axial Aligned Steam Holes, Self-Clean with 11 Preset Steam & Temp Settings
Ceramic! Axial Aligned! Digital!!!!
Marketing has ruined the world. Do marketers know they must go to hell?
Why can’t Apple make the lens flush like Samsung? They used to be innovators not followers with design!
They're almost back to a flat phone. Return to flat phone would be nice.
The only thing Apple has innovated, since 2012, is marketing.
Look, to print an 8 x 10 photo at 300 DPI requires a 7.2 megapixel image (3000w x 2400h in landscape). That's it.
7MP cameras are no longer good enough, though, because we do want to be able to take photos that display at high resolution on 4k, 5k and 8k displays. Digital needs are greater than print needs these days.
So, for an 8K display you need 7680 x 4320. That's 33 megapixel. That's it.
There is some truth that having additional resolution can help with certain post-processing operations, especially if images are then re-sampled smaller, so 48 megapixel sensors are OK in my opinion.
Mostly, this specifications race is a way for Samsung to sell more memory, SSD and cloud storage. 200 megapixels is just wasteful. Some comments:
200 megapixel images with a tiny lens are just wasteful. Period. Look at the $6,000 Canon DSLR/mirrorless cameras with $2500 lenses. How many megapixels are they? 24 to 45 megapixel.
Note: Comments about the photos being bad, or blurry, etc. aren't accurate. Most modern phone sensors perform similarly in terms of image quality. They won't be bad images from a 200mp sensor, they just won't be better in any meaningful way.
7MP cameras are no longer good enough, though, because we do want to be able to take photos that display at high resolution on 4k, 5k and 8k displays. Digital needs are greater than print needs these days.
So, for an 8K display you need 7680 x 4320. That's 33 megapixel. That's it.
There is some truth that having additional resolution can help with certain post-processing operations, especially if images are then re-sampled smaller, so 48 megapixel sensors are OK in my opinion.
Mostly, this specifications race is a way for Samsung to sell more memory, SSD and cloud storage. 200 megapixels is just wasteful. Some comments:
- The tiny optics don't support such incredible resolutions.
- The file sizes are just crazy -- RAW files can be larger than 250MB per image. This requires more device storage, more cloud storage, more disk storage, more backup storage, more transfer file, more bandwidth, more time to resize when uploading to social media, more memory used, more time to effect changes when editing, etc.
- No social media platform will benefit from 200 megapixel cameras. They all resize to reasonable resolutions and use copious amounts of compression that totally negate the resolution of these images.
- Smaller pixels mean less light gathering per pixel -- it's basic physics. A 10-micron pixel will gather more photons from the target in a night shot than a 2-micron pixel. On the iPhone, night shots require pixel binning in the sensor (from 48 to 12mp) -- you can't shoot 48mb night images.
- A 200mp camera allows you to print a 300 dpi photo at 4.5 feet by 3.5 feet or so. How often do you think users do that? From that tiny lens? They would use a real camera if they needed to print posters, fine art and wall murals.
200 megapixel images with a tiny lens are just wasteful. Period. Look at the $6,000 Canon DSLR/mirrorless cameras with $2500 lenses. How many megapixels are they? 24 to 45 megapixel.
Note: Comments about the photos being bad, or blurry, etc. aren't accurate. Most modern phone sensors perform similarly in terms of image quality. They won't be bad images from a 200mp sensor, they just won't be better in any meaningful way.
I agree. The purpose of the 200 megapixel feature is purely for being able to market a superlative.
Physics dictates that there is a diffraction limit given by the size of the lens and its focal length. I don’t have the detailed geometric specs of the lens, but I am quite sure that its angular resolution results in a diffractions spot size considerably larger than the sensor pixel dimension.
Details about the diffraction limit