Julian Ryder, 25 Nov 2018I've tested The P20Pro an Mate20Pro camera, owned the P20.
For the moment the P20Pro has a be... moreSoftware on Mate 20 pro more better & mature than P20 pro. Some parts of P20 pro better (micro contrast, highlight preserved) are because of the monochrome sensor that absence in Mate 20.
Wait for P30 series 40mp main + Ultra Wide + Telephoto + Monochrome. It'll be a perfect camera smartphone.
I've tested The P20Pro an Mate20Pro camera, owned the P20.
For the moment the P20Pro has a better camera software than Mate20.
The P20Pro is better comparison for the Pixels.
I own a Pixel 1, I find the Night Mode better overall than Huawei's, but worse in handling light sources (hazy pictures).
lacp, 25 Nov 2018You must be seeing badly. Samsung inferior and worse than Sony in camera department? Actually?... moreSamsung and Apple hide behind low resolution , with 12MP any photo looks nice . ..
If both had more than 18MP photos would look like painting too .
Go ahead and download pics from S9+, XS and XZ3 ( turn it into 12MP), you will see.
Samsung phones fall apart when iso pass 400, Sony phones can deal better .
It is easy to say that A at iso200 is better than B at iso800, but forget that B is better than A at lower iso and if both use high iso...
Difference between samples of xz2p and note9 is huge, like iphone Xs against 6s .
Samsung copied the sensor and still could not do better....
Keep believing youtubers
lacp, 25 Nov 2018You must be seeing badly. Samsung inferior and worse than Sony in camera department? Actually?... moreSamsung is superior nowadays for videos?
I'd say it's quite true for iPhones, but HELL NO for Samsung. Seriously, they're average at best for a flagship. 4K@60fps just limited to 5 minutes and frame yet isn't consistent either.
Sony's 4K HDR could be for as long as it possibly can.
When you say that Sony has nothing to show these days, I would guess that Samsung wouldn't have a memory-stacked sensor on the Galaxy S and Note 9 devices this year.
The 1/1.7" sensor on the Mate 20 Pro? A Sony one.
The new ISOCELL 48MP Quad Bayer sensor? Sony created that type of sensor earlier.
The new 'Top Shot' feature from Google? Sony has had that already last year, called 'Predictive Capture' and for even better resolution.
Most of the camera technologies for smartphones today are from Sony, so if you say that they have nothing to show anymore, you haven't really seen anything in the market lately.
dougybuggy, 25 Nov 2018Oh and I should also mention that the way Night Sight produces photos is very unpleasant. I do... moreWell the main point of using Night Sight is to create a brighter image, and both just deliver on that.
You complain that Night Sight turns your low light image into a daylight image when it's technically the same as Night Mode.
If you ever feel that the exposure is too high, you can post process it later on, but there's nothing you can do to increase the amount of light on a darker image (if ever you'd need more light).
dougybuggy, 25 Nov 2018Your comment's whole premise is based on Night Sight being as good as Night Mode. Unfortunatel... moreAgain, it's thoroughly caused by the inferior hardware of the Pixel 3, hence they can't be directly compared to each other.
The fact that the Night Sight could gather almost as much light as Night Mode does in an inferior hardware already makes it the better software, because for such hardware difference, I expected Night Mode from Huawei to bring up the shadows in the left side of the image of the light bulb. It doesn't.
though the bulb shot is amazing with the visible filament, all the text on the book looks like painted.
Wes, 25 Nov 2018This would have been a much better article if it included the Oneplus 6T. 6T is out of league with crap night mode cam. Unfortunately.
Anonymous, 25 Nov 2018Cameras do not need HDR mode like phones because the much bigger sensor will give the much hig... moreYou must be seeing badly. Samsung inferior and worse than Sony in camera department? Actually? There is something wrong with your eyes. As in photography, as in video Samsung is superior now days. In reality Sony haven't nothing to show of new in now days in mobile department, only the camera sensors, only that, but better that Samsung and their Isocell sensors, no way.
This would have been a much better article if it included the Oneplus 6T.
what's so special about this? my Zenfone Zoom 1 uses pixel binning and produces even brighter night images, at 3MP though, but i doubt these ones have higher preserved detail.
Shanti Dope, 25 Nov 2018Who told you so? We may not know, Google has only started developing their own Night Sight wh... moreOh and I should also mention that the way Night Sight produces photos is very unpleasant. I do NOT want my night time photos to look like they are shot in the day time. Look at the bar photos on the Pixel 3. They look ridiculous because it looks like there is a ray of sunshine going through a dark bar. Waaaaay too much overprocessing. Compare that to Night Mode where the photos turn out visible but not in a way that distorts the original shot into a bright sunny day.
Shanti Dope, 25 Nov 2018Who told you so? We may not know, Google has only started developing their own Night Sight wh... moreYour comment's whole premise is based on Night Sight being as good as Night Mode. Unfortunately, it is not. Look at the light bulb photos. Google blows it out and turns it into a white mess whereas you can actually see the FILAMENT in Night Mode. That is unbelievable. Also, check out the tripod photos at the end. The Huawei captures waaaaay more detail compared to the Pixel 3. The Pixel 3 unfortunately doesn't seem to gain any more detail even with a ledge or tripod. Lastly, check out the auto photos. The Pixel 3 is pitch black in the bar photos. Basically, useless. While the Huawei produces usable photos even in Auto mode.
Anonymous, 25 Nov 2018Gsmarena refuses to name a winner in the night mode shoot out between the Pixel 3 and the Mate... moreCameras do not need HDR mode like phones because the much bigger sensor will give the much higher DR.
They don't even need a f1.8 lens to outperform cellphones, even a f4 will be enough.
When you see a night photo of XZ2 Premium at night the UHS does not work all the time, it will show up just in very low light. Most of the time it will use Night Scene or Low Light...
Admit, it does better than both for photos and videos ,not even needed to use 1s shutter.
While Apple and Samsung fail miserably under same situations.
Even poor OP6 deals better than S9+ and Xs when iso passes 600.
LIRKER, 25 Nov 2018How can people favour more to Mate 20 Pro, the images are insanely too oversharpening and over... morebecause theyre better on the huawei, theres less overblowing of lighting and the images arent soft
Huawei has better pics with lighting and are more cripsier.. the pixel is soft and blurry
overall I think that the Huawei Mate 20 pro takes the better night pictures. Look at the details of the bulb. It is simply amazing. The lights in general have clearer edges.
Gsmarena refuses to name a winner in the night mode shoot out between the Pixel 3 and the Mate 20 Pro. Well here's my 'Final thoughts' which gsmarena didn't quite elaborate as to which of the two truly won (possibly because both Huawei and Google are generous site sponsors):
Both smartphone cameras output garbage photos in low light compared to a dSLR with an equivalent prime lens. And no, HDR is not exclusive to smartphones so it's not true dSLR's can't capture night scenes that preserve highlight and shadow details in all their nocturnal glory. It's also not true that these smartphones [even if they cost more than a dSLR body], can replace a dSLR or any interchangeable camera with a bag of lenses. Most newer dSLR's and mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras have auto HDR modes that output JPEG photos with way even more dynamic range than any smartphone (that is, if you are 'fond' of auto-only mode, but which, if you want better results, exposure bracketing while capturing in RAW will yield way better results than any auto HDR mode.)
In short, there is just no comparison between dSLR's/interchangeable lens cameras and smartphones for low light photo and video capture. PERIOD.
Now that I've made that clear, let's compare overall image quality in low light between the Mate 20 Pro and the Pixel 3: Based on all photos I downloaded and compared in my calibrated 28" 4K monitor (32 each for both Mate 20 PRO and Pixel 3), I can say the Pixel 3 output CRUSHES the Mate 20 Pro output in overall photo quality and most especially in fine detail retention for MOST but not all of the 32 photos. Sure the Mate 20 Pro is overall, a lot sharper, a lot cleaner, with better highlight detail retention and a lot less noisy in most of these low light shots, but it is also more blotchy and more watercolor-like, with excessive overprocessing, oversmoothing/noise reduction and oversharpening. No doubt the Mate 20 PRO's photos will look better on mobile phone screens but bad in any calibrated 28" or larger 4K monitor (compared to the Pixel 3's output).
Anybody can make the Pixel 3 output look as clean, sharp, noise free, with nice yellowish ambiance (rather than bluish tone), and devoid of fine detail as the Mate 20 PRO but you can't make the Mate 20 PRO output look as detailed as the Pixel 3 with the Mate 20 PRO's default excessive/overboard JPEG processing that robs the photo of its fine detail and puts too much sharpening/edge enhancement.
But we are talking about auto mode only. The Mate 20 PRO has manual modes while the Pixel 3 doesn't have any and it has remarkably better highlight detail handling with none of the Pixel 3's chromatic aberrations/lens flares. So if you know your way around manual mode, you can certainly make the Mate 20 PRO, output WAY better low light photos than the Pixel 3 with the correct manual settings.
So there, for 'auto-only' low light shooters who avoid 'manual or PRO camera modes' like the plague, the Pixel 3 is the clear winner here but for those with some photographic knowledge or those who do know how to use manual/PRO modes (and some RAW/DNG postprocessing), the Mate 20 PRO wins.
If I were to buy a new smartphone with only the Pixel 3 and Mate 20 Pro as the only choices available, I'd choose the Mate 20 Pro every single time because it just has way too many features which the crippled Pixel phone doesn't have (dual SIM, huge battery, triple cameras [wide, ultrawide and telephoto which are really versatile and liberating], storage expansion [although proprietary], IR blaster, etc.)
So yes, I'll give credit where credit is due: The Pixel 3's night sight is the best bar none in detail retention in low light IN AUTO MODE. But make no mistake. I will still recommend the Mate 20 PRO if you are at all serious about photography and want your smartphone to do so much more not only in the area of photography but also in other areas as well (it's got dual sim, a much bigger battery for longer photo/video coverage, etc. [all those other features mentioned above].)
As for the Sony XZ2 Premium's night mode, I can't comment as it wasn't directly compared here BUT, based on photos downloaded from previous Gsmarena reviews of XZ2 Premium ('superior auto in night mode'), I am 100% sure it can't quite outperform either the Mate 20 Pro's night mode or Pixel 3's night sight. The XZ2 Premium's 'superior auto' has better/tamer processing/sharpening/noise reduction than the Mate 20 PRO but the overall output is darker with lower dynamic range and lower in fine detail retention than the Mate 20 PRO. That puts the Sony well behind the Mate 20 PRO AND the Pixel 3 despite its 'image fusion' technology and despite how its diehard fans claim otherwise.
Gsmarena team forget to mentioned that while details are comparable pixel photos definitely noisier compared to Mate.
Walter C. Dornez, 25 Nov 2018It's also one 12 mp sensor vs 3 sensors adding up to 68 mp total. I know that MP don't matter,... moreWhen taking normal FoV low light pictures, the Mate 20 Pro only uses its main sensor for capturing images. Heck, it even refuses to use its telephoto lens in low light and instead use the mighty digital zoom from the main sensor, so it's still a 40MP (10MP for software tricks) vs 12MP battle between these two.
If Google insisted on using a single sensor, they could've at least put a massive 1/1.5" sensor of the same resolution, aperture, and OIS instead to somehow compensate for the lack of additional sensor/s.
Even better, they could've tried embedding a memory on the sensor for faster full-resolution sensor readout, which would be a big help for taking multiple frames.