Google Pixel 2 Sets New Record for Overall Smartphone Camera Quality

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
It appears Google outdid themselves this year, nearly breaking DxOMark’s smartphone camera ranking system: the site has given the Pixel 2 a score of 98, which is a first for any smartphone. Last year, the Pixel scored a 90, which at that time, was one of the best. To keep things in perspective the Pixel 2 sits alone at 98, with the Galaxy Note 8 and iPhone 8 Plus at 94, the iPhone 8 at 92, the HTC U11 and 1st-Gen Pixel at 90, then other devices coming in below that. Additional sample images may be found here.

The Google Pixel 2 is the top-performing mobile device camera we’ve tested, with a record-setting overall score of 98. Impressively, it manages this despite having “only” a single-camera design for its main camera. Its top scores in most of our traditional photo and video categories put it ahead of our previous (tied) leaders, the Apple iPhone 8 Plus and the Samsung Galaxy Note 8, despite the Pixel 2 coming in lower in the new Zoom and Bokeh categories. The Pixel 2 is also a major step forward from the Pixel (which was our top scorer when it was released a year ago), moving from 90 to 98.
 
Now if they can only produce them in sufficient numbers to meet the demand. Looks like a really solid device.
 
How much longer with DxOMark's system matter? Every phone seems to get 90+ these days.

They've gotten to the point that most people couldn't tell a difference.
 
Agreed. All I read is "every flagship smartphone these days has a great camera."
 
I wonder what goes into that score? Do they factor in the free unlimited cloud photo storage or only the quality of the hardware and the pics that are produced?

I ask because if that even gives then 1% a better score, then to me at least this score is useless.
 
Last edited:
Lord_Exodia said:
I wonder what goes into that score? Do they factor in the free unlimited cloud photo storage or only the quality of the hardware and the pics that are produced?

I ask because if that even gives then 1% a better score, then to me at least this score is useless.
Click to expand...


Should be just the camera and only the camera.

The idea of DxOMark Score is to quantify the amount of information captured by the camera, taking into account all the optical aberrations and sensor characteristics measured by DxO Labs. This quantity is called the information capacity of a camera.
Click to expand...

"Information capacity" is the key point here. Every pixel is capable of getting information. Sensor and optics can dictate how accurate that information is to the real world (out of focus can blur values of surrounding pixels, small pixels may not get enough light to render accurate colors, etc).

A DSLR is capable of such high quality photos because the sensor and optics are big enough to acquire a lot of information.
 
Last edited:
I could have upgraded my SGS7 a few months ago but I might be glad I waited. I haven't had a google phone before but I do like that they get updates quicker than all the rest.
 
now the benchmark should be 60fps 1080p video in low light, and 60fps 1080p in busy high activity scenes. ( fidelity is still pretty crap . compression is crap. codec used fail often leading to non-universal playback )

pics quality are indistinguishable now. whether any pic is good or not is now up to the scene setup and the capabilities of the shooter
 
No doubt, google has done an excellent job. But without using dual camera lens, how is it possible to produce such a quality?
 
maverick786us said:
No doubt, google has done an excellent job. But without using dual camera lens, how is it possible to produce such a quality?
Click to expand...


My good friend, sadly you have fallen victim to the evils of 'marketing'

No where on God's green earth or in this universe do you need 'dual lenses' to obtain quality photos .... clearly.

Stop taking adverts, video, print, word of mouth as a source for your facts
 
SixFootDuo said:
My good friend, sadly you have fallen victim to the evils of 'marketing'

No where on God's green earth or in this universe do you need 'dual lenses' to obtain quality photos .... clearly.

Stop taking adverts, video, print, word of mouth as a source for your facts
Click to expand...


iPhone 8 Plus
 
bigddybn said:
... is a perfect example of that marketing.
Click to expand...

yes I missed a point. that the primary use of dual lens in iPhone 7 & 8 plus is to achieve optical Zoom, which I am not sure if Pixel XL 2 has it. But iPhone 8 plus overall picture quality is better than classic iphone 8.

I can be a marketing gimmick, Note 8 is also using dual lens
 
Dual cameras are good for obtaining depth information, allowing for cool bokeh effects on iPhone and 2x optical zoom. Where Google opted to use a larger sensor and machine learning to achieve the same effects.

Pretty cool, if only they could fix their bezels...
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Being the best cellphone camera is the camera equivalent to winning the special olympics.
Click to expand...
I don't get the negativity. Having a camera in my pocket that produces excellent images in most situations is awesome. I used to buy a fancy dSLR and some lenses for big trips. Now thanks to the phone I have trouble getting the motivation to lug around a ton of camera gear.
 
Epic| said:
I don't get the negativity. Having a camera in my pocket that produces excellent images in most situations is awesome. I used to buy a fancy dSLR and some lenses for big trips. Now thanks to the phone I have trouble getting the motivation to lug around a ton of camera gear.
Click to expand...

The negativity is based around the whole "camera wars" thing with cell phones acting like they matter. Fact is basically every non shit cellphone has had a camera that easily does what you describe for 8+ years now. All these "records" and other nonsense don't make a bit of difference as the pictures are largely no better than they were then. That is why I made the special olympics comment as the best cellphone camera is barely better than the average and still complete garbage compared to a DSLR and always will be for that matter. Fact of the matter is software is never going to make up for the simple reality that there needs to be a certain amount of glass and space to achieve certain results. So yes like you I use the cell camera for everyday stuff, but when I need to take photo's that matter my cellphone is never ever going to compete with my Nikon and so I find the whole cellphone camera focus to be laughably absurd. My wife has an iPhone 7+, arguably one of the better cameras of that generation and even that under the best normal situation takes no better of a picture than my old as shit Galaxy Nexus.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
The negativity is based around the whole "camera wars" thing with cell phones acting like they matter. Fact is basically every non shit cellphone has had a camera that easily does what you describe for 8+ years now. All these "records" and other nonsense don't make a bit of difference as the pictures are largely no better than they were then. That is why I made the special olympics comment as the best cellphone camera is barely better than the average and still complete garbage compared to a DSLR and always will be for that matter. Fact of the matter is software is never going to make up for the simple reality that there needs to be a certain amount of glass and space to achieve certain results. So yes like you I use the cell camera for everyday stuff, but when I need to take photo's that matter my cellphone is never ever going to compete with my Nikon and so I find the whole cellphone camera focus to be laughably absurd. My wife has an iPhone 7+, arguably one of the better cameras of that generation and even that under the best normal situation takes no better of a picture than my old as shit Galaxy Nexus.
Click to expand...

I agree, sort of.. The smartphone camera is good enough for most people and when you only upload the pics to facebook or Instagram, it really doesn't matter what camera you use.. Adjusting the pics on the fly is a big win for a smartphone.

People now days don't want to mess with anything, that's why they don't even own the desktops..
 
Dekoth-E- said:
The negativity is based around the whole "camera wars" thing with cell phones acting like they matter. Fact is basically every non shit cellphone has had a camera that easily does what you describe for 8+ years now. All these "records" and other nonsense don't make a bit of difference as the pictures are largely no better than they were then. That is why I made the special olympics comment as the best cellphone camera is barely better than the average and still complete garbage compared to a DSLR and always will be for that matter. Fact of the matter is software is never going to make up for the simple reality that there needs to be a certain amount of glass and space to achieve certain results. So yes like you I use the cell camera for everyday stuff, but when I need to take photo's that matter my cellphone is never ever going to compete with my Nikon and so I find the whole cellphone camera focus to be laughably absurd. My wife has an iPhone 7+, arguably one of the better cameras of that generation and even that under the best normal situation takes no better of a picture than my old as shit Galaxy Nexus.
Click to expand...
No.
 
hmz said:
I agree, sort of.. The smartphone camera is good enough for most people and when you only upload the pics to facebook or Instagram, it really doesn't matter what camera you use.. Adjusting the pics on the fly is a big win for a smartphone.

People now days don't want to mess with anything, that's why they don't even own the desktops..
Click to expand...

Right, I don't disagree that. I have no problem with the fact that for most people it is good enough. My gripe is against the manufactures media trying to push this stupid idea that their camera is somehow special. If they put half as much effort into battery life and call quality that is something that benefits everyone.

Epic| said:
No.
Click to expand...

Yes.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Being the best cellphone camera is the camera equivalent to winning the special olympics.
Click to expand...

Maybe for you, but it's one of my main deciding factors when upgrading. I don't need 1000 stupid effing aps with ads, I need a phone that works as a phone and can take quality pictures. Mainly to use for the kids, since I always have my phone on me. Upgrading from a lumia 830 which took AMAZING pictures, but it's really going to suck losing the hardware camera button.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
The negativity is based around the whole "camera wars" thing with cell phones acting like they matter. Fact is basically every non shit cellphone has had a camera that easily does what you describe for 8+ years now. All these "records" and other nonsense don't make a bit of difference as the pictures are largely no better than they were then. That is why I made the special olympics comment as the best cellphone camera is barely better than the average and still complete garbage compared to a DSLR and always will be for that matter. Fact of the matter is software is never going to make up for the simple reality that there needs to be a certain amount of glass and space to achieve certain results. So yes like you I use the cell camera for everyday stuff, but when I need to take photo's that matter my cellphone is never ever going to compete with my Nikon and so I find the whole cellphone camera focus to be laughably absurd. My wife has an iPhone 7+, arguably one of the better cameras of that generation and even that under the best normal situation takes no better of a picture than my old as shit Galaxy Nexus.
Click to expand...

Cell phone cameras have made significant amounts of progress over the recent years. This is particularly true in low light situations which is what a lot of cell phone manufacturers are focusing on now.

Here is a comparison of the Nexus 6 (Nov 2014) and the Note 8 (Sep 2017):
https://www.gsmarena.com/piccmp.php3?idType=5&idPhone1=8505&idPhone2=6604

The difference is massive, and these are things that are visible in regular pictures outside of a staged environment as well. This is with cell phones that were only 3 years apart and it gets even more dramatic if you want to go back further in time.
 
Biznatch said:
Maybe for you, but it's one of my main deciding factors when upgrading. I don't need 1000 stupid effing aps with ads, I need a phone that works as a phone and can take quality pictures. Mainly to use for the kids, since I always have my phone on me. Upgrading from a lumia 830 which took AMAZING pictures, but it's really going to suck losing the hardware camera button.
Click to expand...

Any phone on the market takes as good of a picture as the lumia, so no it isn't even a thinking point. Quit buying into all the staged marketing drivel. The only thing of note is the hardware camera button which was an actual unique feature.

Fleat said:
Cell phone cameras have made significant amounts of progress over the recent years. This is particularly true in low light situations which is what a lot of cell phone manufacturers are focusing on now.

Here is a comparison of the Nexus 6 (Nov 2014) and the Note 8 (Sep 2017):
https://www.gsmarena.com/piccmp.php3?idType=5&idPhone1=8505&idPhone2=6604

The difference is massive, and these are things that are visible in regular pictures outside of a staged environment as well. This is with cell phones that were only 3 years apart and it gets even more dramatic if you want to go back further in time.
Click to expand...

Marketing hype and FUD. My Galaxy nexus can and does take as good of a picture in any real world scenario as any other phone on the market right now. There is absolutely no real world difference not even in low light. That is all staged nonsense. The Gnex is what 6 years old now? Its pictures are undiscernable from my wife's iPhone 7 and a plethora of other top android handsets I've compared it too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top