Google Pixel 7 Pro Camera test : is it the best camera out there ? - Chuyên Trang Chia Sẻ Kiến Thức Thời Trang Mới Nhất

We put the Google Pixel 7 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

Primary: 50 MP 1/1.31-inch sensor, 1.2μm pixels, 24mm equivalent f/1.85-aperture lens, OIS, PDAF, Laser-AF
Ultra-wide: 12MP 1/2.86-inch sensor, 1.25μm pixels, 13.4mm equivalent f/2.2-aperture lens, PDAF
Tele : 48MP 1/2.55-inch sensor, 1.4μm pixels with binning, 116.2mm equivalent f/3.5-aperture lens, OIS, PDAF
Video: 4K at 30/60fps, 1080p at 30/60fps (tested at 4K/30fps)

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

camera

148

photo
Exposure

113

117

Color

119

Best

Autofocus

114

116

Texture

112

114

Noise

116

Artifacts

bokeh
Bokeh

preview
Preview

143

zoom
Tele

109

116

Wide

111

117

143

video
Exposure

106

115

Color

110

117

Autofocus

115

117

Texture

108

115

Noise

107

118

Artifacts

Stabilization

116

117

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 168

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 157

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 127

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 143

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

3rd

Position in Global Ranking

1. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

2. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

3. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

3. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

5. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

5. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

7. Huawei P50 Pro

143

8. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

8. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

8. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

11. Google Pixel 7

140

11. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)

140

11. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

14. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

15. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

16. Vivo X90 Pro

136

16. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

16. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

19. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

19. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

19. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

22. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

22. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

24. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

24. Apple iPhone 14

133

24. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)

133

24. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

133

28. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

28. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

30. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

30. Xiaomi 13

130

32. Huawei P40 Pro

129

32. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

32. Xiaomi 12T Pro

129

32. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

36. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

37. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

37. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

39. Google Pixel 6

126

39. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

39. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)

126

39. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

43. Apple iPhone 13 mini

125

43. Apple iPhone 13

125

43. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

43. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

47. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

47. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

49. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

49. Google Pixel 6a

122

49. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

49. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

53. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

53. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

120

55. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

56. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

57. Apple iPhone 12

117

57. Apple iPhone 12 mini

117

57. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

57. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

117

57. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)

117

62. Apple iPhone 11

116

62. Asus Zenfone 8

116

62. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

116

65. Honor 70

115

65. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

65. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

65. Xiaomi 12T

115

69. Nothing Phone(1)

114

69. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G

114

69. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

114

69. Oppo Find X5

114

69. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

74. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

74. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

113

74. Xiaomi 12

113

77. Oppo Reno8 5G

112

77. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

79. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

79. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

79. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)

111

82. Google Pixel 5

109

82. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

109

84. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos)

108

84. Xiaomi 11T Pro

108

86. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

107

87. Oppo Find X3 Neo

106

88. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

89. Huawei P40

102

90. Black Shark 5 Pro

101

90. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

101

92. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

100

92. Google Pixel 4a

100

94. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra

95. Oppo Find X5 Lite

96. Oppo Reno4 5G

97. Oppo A94 5G

97. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

99. Samsung Galaxy A72

99. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

101. Oppo Reno6 5G

102. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G

102. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

104. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G

105. OnePlus Nord CE 5G

106. Vivo Y76 5G

107. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

108. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G

109. Realme 9i 5G

110. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

111. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G

112. Fairphone 4

112. Oppo A78 5G

114. Motorola Moto G62 5G

115. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G

116. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

117. Sony Xperia 10 IV

118. Honor X7

118. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G

120. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11

121. Oppo A77 5G

122. Honor X8 5G

123. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022

124. Crosscall Action-X5

125. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G

126. Crosscall Core-Z5

127. Oppo A57

127. Oppo A16s 5G

3rd

Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking

1. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

2. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

3. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

3. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

5. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

5. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

7. Huawei P50 Pro

143

8. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

8. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

8. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

11. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)

140

11. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

13. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

14. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

15. Vivo X90 Pro

136

15. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

15. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

18. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

18. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

18. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

21. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

21. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

23. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

23. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)

133

25. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

25. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

27. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

28. Huawei P40 Pro

129

28. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

28. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

31. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

32. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

32. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

34. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

34. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

36. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

36. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

38. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

38. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

40. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

40. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

40. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

43. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

44. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

45. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

46. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

47. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

47. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

49. Oppo Find X5

114

49. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

51. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

52. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

53. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

53. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

55. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

Pros

Nice skin tones, even in challenging conditions
Accurate exposure and wide dynamic range in both photo and video
Fast and accurate autofocus in both photo and video, generally wide depth of field in outdoor conditions
Mostly nice contrast, including in backlit portrait scenes
Good detail, especially in bright light
Effective stabilization in both static and walking scenes
Generally good detail at all zoom ranges, from ultra-wide to long range tele

Cons

Shadow noise in high-contrast scenes and low light, both in photo and video
Some highlight clipping in indoor conditions
Color casts in indoor video footage
Slight ringing, flare and hue shift
Some loss of detail, image noise at close-range zoom close -up shots

With a DXOMARK Camera score of 147, the Google Pixel 7 Pro makes it to the very top of our ranking, five years after the Pixel 2, which was the last Google device to achieve this. The Pixel 7 Pro showed very consistent results across all test categories. While the Pixel 7 Pro did not achieve the top scores in the Photo or Video subscores, it still competes with the best, and as a package, it is the currently best option for users who value photo and video performance equally. The device does especially well in our new Friends & Family use case, thanks to strong contrast preservation, nice skin tone rendering, fast capture, and good motion freezing capabilities.

Compared to the Google Pixel 6 Pro, improvements are noticeable in many areas, including zoom and video, thanks to updated software algorithms and better-optimized camera tuning. For example, the camera now comes with a fusion algorithm — something we have seen before on several competitors in the Ultra-Premium segment — that improves texture rendering when using the tele zoom. The system uses image information from both the primary and tele cameras and combines it in order to deliver the best possible image quality at any tele zoom setting.

There is also a macro mode that uses the ultra-wide camera, enabling nice close-up shots in a variety of conditions. The device switches automatically into macro mode as you get closer to a subject. However, this function can be disabled with a quick tap in the app UI.

DXOMARK tests video at the settings that provide the overall best quality. In the case of the Pixel 7 Pro, this is 4K resolution at 30 frames per second, with the HDR10+ option disabled.

Friends & Family

Friends & Family is a new use case score, introduced with the latest version 5 of the DXOMARK Camera test protocol. It has been designed to represent the test device’s ability to capture technically good photos and videos in the most common consumer use cases (family, friends, pets). It is computed from data recorded during Photo, Zoom and Video tests that include people and moving subjects, a total of 60+ scenes both in the lab and real-life scenes with models.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – excellent exposure and skin tones

The Pixel 7 Pro achieves a new top score for the Friends & Family use case and is the best option for those users that shoot portraits in all kinds of conditions and value very realistic rendering. The Pixel is particularly good at accurately rendering a variety of skin tones in all conditions, making it one of the most inclusive smartphones on the market from a camera point of view.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – nice skin tones, even in more difficult light conditions

The camera is also capable of preserving a nice contrast on faces, even in challenging high-contrast scenes. In addition, images show less tone compression on portraits than most competing phones. This natural contrast is sometimes paid for with a slightly low face exposure, but exposure remains within acceptable limits at all times. The Pixel also freezes motion in a scene nicely, with very little motion blur and sharp rendering of moving subjects.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – motion blur well under control, even indoors

In lab, the Google Pixel 7 Pro is able to capture a wider dynamic range than its competitors across most light conditions.

The Pixel 7 Pro also does very well for this use case in video mode, with well-rendered skin tones as well as nice face contrast and exposure, even in difficult backlit scenes. In addition, the autofocus system is very good at tracking subjects and keeping them in focus, even in challenging light.

Low Light

Like Friends and Family, Low light is a new score introduced with the latest update of the Camera test protocol. It is designed to represent a device’s ability to capture technically good photos and videos in the most challenging light conditions. It is computed from data recorded during those Photo, Zoom, and Video tests that are undertaken at light levels below 50 lux.

Like most devices, the Pixel 7 Pro still struggles to provide perfect image quality in low light, but the new model has improved drastically over the last generation, with noticeable improvements across Photo, Zoom, and Video.

Low-light performance is very good and among the best for both Photo and Zoom. Images are slightly darker to preserve the atmosphere of the original low-light portrait or night scene. Even in low light, the camera is still capable of capturing a wide dynamic range and good highlight detail. However, noise is quite intrusive, and color is not quite as accurate as in brighter light. In low light, motion remains a challenge, even though the Pixel 7 Pro is better than most other devices in this respect.

Low-light video is not quite as good as still images, with respect to the competition. Low-light video footage tends to be slightly underexposed, with a pretty low level of detail and noise that becomes more intrusive in the darkest scenes (5 lux and darker). Like on many competitors, dynamic range is limited in low-light video.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s Camera evaluations take place in laboratories and in real-world situations using a wide variety of subjects. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly by measurement software on our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests in which a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo, Zoom, and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an Overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us to receive a full report.

Google Pixel 7 Pro Camera Scores vs Ultra-Premium

This graph compares DXOMARK photo, zoom and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

Photo

148

Google Pixel 7 Pro

154

Honor Magic5 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2,600 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, family, and landscape photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

When shooting still images, the Pixel 7 Pro offers good exposure in all conditions, a wide dynamic range, and good contrast, which is especially noticeable on portrait shots. The autofocus system works accurately and swiftly and details are preserved well on all faces in group images. This is a nice improvement over the Pixel 6 Pro. In addition, autofocus tracking works well, thanks to a great combination of face detection and autofocus accuracy.

Images show a high level of detail, even in low light but sometimes a coarse image noise can be visible, mainly in the shadow areas of the frame. The camera is also pretty good at freezing motion, allowing for good detail on moving subjects, even in difficult conditions. Except for some slight aliasing, artifacts are well under control as well.

Google Pixel 7 Pro Photo scores vs Ultra-Premium

The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera’s main strengths and weaknesses.

Close-Up

Google Pixel 7 Pro – high Level of details in close-up

Apple iPhone 14 Pro – finer level of details

The Pixel 7 Pro has good close-up performances thanks to the automatic switch to its ultra-wide camera, but the image results are still a bit behind the iPhone 14 Pro in terms of details and magnification rate. Pixel 7 Pro users have the option to easily disable the automatic switching to the ultra-wide camera for more manual control when shooting.

Exposure

113

Google Pixel 7 Pro

117

Honor Magic5 Pro

Exposure and color are the key attributes for technically good pictures. For exposure, the main attribute evaluated is the brightness of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the contrast and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera’s ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – accurate target exposure, wide dynamic range with nice contrast

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – slight overexposure on dark skin tone, wide dynamic range

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – accurate target exposure

The Google Pixel 7 Pro delivers a wide dynamic range in all conditions while retaining good contrast in portrait shots. Target exposure is slightly lower than on some competitors but remains accurate in most conditions and contributes to a neutral rendering of the scene. In our test scenes, the Pixel usually provides the best trade-off for dark skin tones, which are often strongly impacted by tone compression, for example on the Xiaomi 12S Ultra or (a little less so) the Honor Magic4 Ultimate. The Pixel also manages to retain detail in all highlight areas in most cases, without any clipping. In comparison, some other devices, such as the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra, offer a more limited dynamic range.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – good exposure, wide dynamic range

The device also does well for landscape shots, delivering good exposure and a wide dynamic range in all conditions. Even in challenging circumstances, for example, night shots, the camera usually manages to capture sufficient light to produce nice image files that contain most of the information available in the scene.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – accurate target exposure, wide dynamic range, and nice contrast

Google Pixel 7 Pro – accurate target exposure in extreme low light conditions

Color

119

Google Pixel 7 Pro

Best

For color, the image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors but we respect a manufacturer’s choice of color signature.

The Google Pixel 7 Pro does very well for the color attribute, with impressive results in skin tones, accurate white balance in all conditions and accurate color rendering, even in difficult high-contrast scenes.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – very accurate skin tones and color rendering

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – pinkish cast on skin tones but accurate color rendering

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – nice skin tones but table and grass oversaturated

In bright outdoor conditions, the device provides a very neutral white balance, with accurate skin tones and color rendering. The difference with the competitors is mostly visible on dark skin tones where many devices struggle. The Google Pixel 7 Pro renders realistic colors across all skin types.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – accurate white balance and skin tones, good color rendering on blue wall and gray sofa

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – strong orange cast on faces, pink cast on sofa

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – slight orange cast on skin tones (within acceptable limits), pink cast on sofa

Google Pixel 7 Pro – accurate skin tones

Huawei P50 Pro – skin in photo is rendered paler than it actually is

Under typical indoor lighting, the camera manages to provide the best rendering of both fair and dark skin tones among competitors. Most rivals tend to produce a strong orange cast on subjects under warm lighting. In high-contrast scenes, the skin tones on the Pixel 7 Pro remain accurate. This is also true for color rendering in the background where some rivals are more inconsistent in terms of saturation and hue fidelity.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – Both subjects are well rendered with an accurate white balance on the scene overall

Huawei P50 Pro – Fair skin tone is too pale on the model on the left, and deep skin tones show some inaccurate green cast

Autofocus

114

Google Pixel 7 Pro

116

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called ‘zero shutter lag’ capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

The Google Pixel 7 Pro’s autofocus performance is comparable to other devices in the Ultra-Premium segment. It comes with an effective Zero Shutter Lag implementation that allows for capture at precisely the same time the shutter button is pressed. Autofocus is fast and accurate across all test conditions, including challenging low-light scenes.

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ7EV Daylight Handheld

This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 1000Lux with Daylight illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. On this scenario, the backlit panels in the scene are set up to simulate a fairly high dynamic range: the luminance ratio between the brightest point and a 18% reflective gray patch is 7, which we denote by a Exposure Value difference of 7. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

The large image sensor in the Pixel 7 Pro’s primary camera module means that depth of field is slightly more limited than on cameras with a smaller sensor and as a result, the background is out of focus. However, the device uses a new algorithm that is capable of recovering texture on faces in the background in order to simulate a wider depth of field. Like on most of the Ultra-Premium competitors that provide similar solutions, the results are somewhat inconsistent and depend on parameters like subject distance. This said, they are promising, and in our tests, they provided an impression of sharpness on faces in the background in several test scenes.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – depth of field

Google Pixel 7 Pro – good sharpness on background model

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – depth of field

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – good sharpness on background model but artifacts give an impression of false detail

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – depth of field

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – background face out of focus

Texture

112

Google Pixel 7 Pro

114

Honor Magic5 Pro

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC) and the Dead Leaves chart.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions

This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

Pixel 7 Pro images usually show a high level of detail. However, in difficult high-contrast scenes and extreme light, our testers still observed a loss of detail. This is no worse than on the competitors, though.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – indoor detail

Google Pixel 7 Pro – good detail on subject

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – indoor detail

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – very good detail

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – indoor detail

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – good detail on subject

Google Pixel 7 Pro – low light detail

Google Pixel 7 Pro – some fine detail in the beard is lost

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – low light detail

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – good details but some texture artifacts

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – low light detail

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – some detail in beard lost

The Google Pixel 7 Pro is also capable of achieving good sharpness and detail on moving elements in the scene. This is especially true for pictures captured in bright light and under indoor conditions, as illustrated by the motion blur graph below.

From 5 lux (indoor) to 1000 lux (outdoor conditions), the Google Pixel 7 Pro provides the best motion-freezing capability among the comparison devices. Under 5 lux, there is a lot of motion blur. (Blur Directional Unit, BdU, is a metric measuring motion blur on a moving object. Lower values mean less visible motion blur).

Noise

Google Pixel 7 Pro

116

Honor Magic5 Pro

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition

This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

Noise is one of the Pixel 7 Pro camera’s weaker points. Image is usually well under control in bright light and in normal indoor scenes, with only a little noise visible. However, under high-contrast conditions, strong coarse noise makes an appearance in the shadows, which can have an impact on the overall rendering of the image. The same happens in difficult low-light scenes. We also observed some inconsistency in terms of noise reduction. In a series of shots of the same scene noise reduction works better in some images than in others.

Google Pixel 7 Po – noise reduction

Google Pixel 7 Po – good noise reduction on subject

Google Pixel 7 Pro – noise reduction

Google Pixel 7 Pro – noise reduction failure on subject

Artifacts

Google Pixel 7 Pro

Google Pixel 6

The artifacts evaluation looks at lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main photo artifacts penalties

Artifacts are usually very well under control on Google devices, and the Pixel 7 Pro is no exception. Fusion artifacts and hue shifts that we can see on many competitors are usually avoided, even in difficult HDR scenes. However, some slight aliasing can be visible, depending on the light conditions, on the content of the image.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – artifacts

Google Pixel 7 Pro – aliasing on windows in the background

Preview

Google Pixel 7 Pro

Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

Preview tests analyze the image quality of the camera app’s preview of the image, with particular attention paid to the difference between the capture and the preview, especially regarding dynamic range and the application of the bokeh effect. Also evaluated is the smoothness of the exposure, color and focus adaptation when zooming from the minimal to the maximal zoom factor available. The preview frame rate is measured using the LED Universal Timer.

The Google Pixel 7 Pro provides an accurate preview of HDR rendering, offering a good idea of the effect in the final capture. Motion of the preview is usually smooth, but a slight lag can be noticeable in difficult backlit situations.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – preview – similar HDR rendering to capture

Google Pixel 7 Pro – capture

However, in contrast to many other Ultra-Premium segment phones, the simulated bokeh effect is not visible in the preview image. You’ll have to capture an image and check it to find out what the effect has done to the scene.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – preview – no bokeh effect

Google Pixel 7 Pro – capture

Bokeh

Google Pixel 7 Pro

Honor Magic5 Pro

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – some segmentation errors on small elements in the scene

The Pixel’s bokeh mode usually works well, with accurate subject segmentation and a nice blur gradient on foreground and background. However, some slight instabilities can be visible on spotlights in the background across a series of consecutive shots.

One of the reasons why the Google Pixel 7 Pro bokeh score is slightly below the best in class, such as the Honor Magic4 Ultimate, is the slightly short focal length used in bokeh simulation. At roughly 36mm, it is not ideal for portrait photography. To fill the frame with the subject, you have to get very close, which can induce distortion and other non-desired effects on faces.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – nice bokeh effect but slightly short focal length

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – focal length allows for frame-filling portrait shots

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – focal length allows for frame-filling portrait shots

Zoom

143

Google Pixel 7 Pro

156

Honor Magic5 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 400 test images in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor, and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings and pinch zoom at various zoom factors from ultra wide to very long-range zoom. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting the images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements of chart mages captured in the lab under different conditions from 20 to 1000 lux and color temperatures from 2300K to 6500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Smartphone zoom technology is evolving across the industry, and the Pixel 7 Pro is no exception. The new model comes with some important improvements over the previous generation. A longer equivalent focal length improves image quality at long tele range, a image fusion is used to improve images captured at medium range. There are still some inconsistencies across a series of images but the camera often manages to capture detail at the center of the frame in tele shots.

At 13.5mm focal length equivalent, the ultra-wide has also been upgraded for a wider field of view. Ultra-wide shots feature a wide dynamic range and nice colors, with only a few distortion artifacts.

Google Pixel 7 Pro Zoom Scores vs Ultra-Premium

This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length. Zooming-in scores are displayed on the right and Zooming-out scores on the left.

Wide

111

Google Pixel 7 Pro

117

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

The Pixel 7 Pro provides very decent ultra-wide image quality. Distortion is well under control and all other image qualities are well managed. The level of detail is not quite on the same level as the best in class, such as the Honor Magic4 Ultimate, but image results are nice in most cases nonetheless.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – accurate target exposure and white balance, distortion well under control

Tele

109

Google Pixel 7 Pro

116

Honor Magic4 Ultimate

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

Tele zoom performance has greatly improved over the Pixel 6 Pro, especially at medium range. This is due to a new fusion algorithm that is capable of recovering detail at the center of the frame by using image information captured by the tele module. This information is then integrated into the image captured by the wider primary camera. This system is mainly used at close and medium range before the dedicated tele module takes fully over. This kind of system has been in use on devices from brands such as Huawei or Honor, but this is the first time we are seeing it on a Pixel.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – long range tele zoom

Google Pixel 7 Pro – only very fine detail lost on the subject

Some instabilities can be noticeable, though, especially across a series of shots. At long range (120mm and longer), the device offers the same image quality that was already available on the Pixel 6 Pro, with nice and sharp images in most conditions.

5 lux
20 lux
100 lux
1000 lux

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length

This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions.The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality.Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length

Google Pixel 7 Pro – Long-range zoom

Google Pixel 7 Pro – Some fine details are preserved

Apple iPhone 14 Pro – Long-range zoom

Apple iPhone 14 Pro – Fine details are lost

Video

143

Google Pixel 7 Pro

149

Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2.5 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

In terms of video performance, the Pixel lags slightly behind one of its main rivals, the Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max, but nonetheless offers an overall very good video experience. Exposure is usually well managed, with a wide dynamic range retaining good highlight and shadow detail. Colors are usually nice, despite some casts in difficult high-contrast scenes. Video autofocus has been perfected, accurately detecting the subject in the scene.

Detail is well preserved but, just like for still images, noise can become quite intrusive in high-contrast and low-light scenes. Overall, the device does very well for video and does best in bright outdoor conditions.

Google Pixel 7 Pro Video scores vs Ultra-Premium

Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

Exposure

106

Google Pixel 7 Pro

115

Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness of the main subject and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Video target exposure is accurate in most conditions, even in difficult low-light scenes. Like in photo mode, the camera opts for a slightly darker exposure than the iPhone, but faces, including dark skin tones in low light, are hardly ever underexposed.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – accurate target exposure on both subjects

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – accurate target exposure on both subjects

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – slight underexposure, inaccurate exposure on dark skin tones

Dynamic range in video is fairly wide, with smooth brightness transitions in bright sunlight.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – accurate target exposure and wide dynamic range

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – accurate target exposure

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – accurate target exposure but some shadow clipping

Color

110

Google Pixel 7 Pro

117

Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

In bright outdoor conditions, colors are vivid and accurate, with an overall neutral white balance and accurate skin tones. However, when recording video indoors, the camera sometimes struggles to manage color transitions. As a result, our testers observed a very warm orange cast, especially in high-contrast conditions. In low-light, color rendering and white balance are accurate. In addition, skin tones are decent across all skin types.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – warm orange cast when bright window is in the field of view

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – slight yellow cast, vivid and accurate colors

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – white balance transition could be smoother

Texture

108

Google Pixel 7 Pro

115

Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels

This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

Pixel 7 Pro video footage shows good detail, especially in bright light. In low light, the level of detail is in line with the competition. Fine detail is lost, but overall the scene is nicely rendered in most conditions.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – loss of finest detail in areas of low contrast, good edge detail

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – good detail when motion blur is avoided

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – loss of fine detail but good edge detail

Noise

107

Google Pixel 7 Pro

118

Samsung Galaxy A23 5G

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Spatial Noise
Temporal Noise

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

Like in photo mode, our testers observed some strong coarse noise in HDR and low-light scenes. This is slightly more intrusive in video than for photo , mainly because of the temporal aspect of noise, with noise specs changing position in every video frame. This said, the Pixel still does better for noise than some strong competitors, including the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon). However, it is outperformed by others with a more effective noise reduction strategy, like the Honor Magic4 Ultimate.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – luminance and chromatic noise in areas of plain color

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – very limited noise

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – luminance noise during motion

Stabilization

116

Google Pixel 7 Pro

117

Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Video stabilization is effective, even in challenging running sequences. Only a small amount of camera motion and some frame shift is noticeable. In low light, sharpness differences between frames become pretty noticeable.

Google Pixel 7 Pro – effective stabilization when running during recording, some frame shift

Honor Magic4 Ultimate – effective stabilization when running during recording, some frame shift

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) – effective stabilization when running during recording, some frame shift

Artifacts

Google Pixel 7 Pro

Xiaomi 12S Ultra

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Like in photo mode, artifacts are overall well under control and rendering is consistent across all conditions.

Main video artifacts penalties