Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- How does it compare to the Samsung flagship phone cameras? I have to say I was impressed by the Samsung cameras, although being Android based it's not really an option for me. It'd be like trading a Porsche 911 for a Pontiac Aztec.by sgt
- Where is a comparing site where the exact same subject and lightening used? Why https://www.gsmarena.com/piccmp.php3 stopped it? I can only find these "trust me" reviews.by azatom
- The caption on the close up says: “Details preserved on both face, face in the back in focus”. But it seems to me that a lot of detail is actually missing! On the later pictures you see a lot of skin “imperfections”, which looks much better. The 18 pro picture is way too smooth!by Jaxan
- > "DXOMARK’s objective measurements and perceptual analyses"
Where are the measurements? All I see are vague generalities like "well-rendered images with improved contrast and natural-looking skin tones". I guess those are the "perceptual analyses"? Is there a "See full measurements" button I'm missing? How do they come up with numbers like "157 Portrait", "172 Outdoors"?
by gyomu - Comparing that 17 vs 18 photo id say it’s less a case of detail preserved and more heavy AI post processing.
That closeup zoom 18 eye shot has that classic AI smooth skin look AI influencers all have.
by Havoc - Someone should assemble a chain of iPhone camera review comparison images published over the years, 18 → 17, 17 → 16, 16 → 15 etc. showing how each year's new phone being so much better than the previous year's somehow becomes perceivably bad next to the next year's phone.by velcrovan
- I'm surprised that in no reviews of the iPhone 18 camera there is mention of the bad quality bokeh, it has heavy ring shapes that looks like what you'd get from a cheap catadioptric lens.
Edit: e.g. the tree in one of the images in the page: https://www.dxomark.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/PoleHDR_D...
by matja - Always worth to note:
DXOMARK sells test equipment and consulting services for (among others) camera tuning.
Naturally, they won't attack the image quality of a customer who purchased their test equipment and/or consulting service (usually not publicly known who did that), so they often tone down some of their statements when they review a device (and shift the attention to other areas).
Always interesting to check out the scores of DXOMARK competitors in parallel, e.g. VCX[0] which strives for an objective scoring scheme (but didn't test the device yet, indicating that they at least didn't have an early sample)
by rickdeckard