huawei does a better job with evening the lighting and has less noise but the night sight brings out more detail. both have come a long way.
Huawei has come a long way and is starting to trade blows with the biggest names. Competition drives innovation.
I actually prefer the look for the Mate 20's night shots to most of the Pixel 3's. I own the Pixel 3 XL as well as the Pixel 2 XL. Great phones. Crazy that despite these 3 and 4 camera phones, the Pixel is still able to hold a candle with its single lens. I can only imagine how far the bar would be set if the Pixel 4 drops with dual cameras lol.
I'm impressed on my Mate 20 X, so I'll hold judgement if I can hold a real Pixel 3/XL and compare both in real time.
BigDisplay, 26 Nov 2018They both doing a great job, cmon guys its a phone not a pro high end camera. And for the chi... morei like your comment but still without comparing you dont get great product here but comparing with agression and nologic is chilidish like what you mentioned :-)
The Huawei does a better job. The Pixel 3 has way too much lens flare and light sources look like they have orbs. The Huawei also has more dynamic range and is a lot more tolerant of moving subjects.
Nick Tagataka, 26 Nov 2018P20 Pro simply has more aggressive sharpening applied in low light so it looks sharper, but th... moreno ... it has all the data from the monochrome sensor to use in night mode that the mate 20 pro does not have ... the monochrome data excels at things like low light and details and textures and huawei got rid of it to add versatility at the expense of better quality images ... ive owned both the mate 20 pro and the p20 pro and sent the mate 20 pro back because the camera was better on the p20 pro and it was 300 pounds cheaper
Conclusions are more simpler than that: One does it all with one camera, the other does it the same or slightly better with 3... :)
I personally find the Huawei night mode more movement tolerant. But ok, I only tried it on mate 10 pro and p20 pro.
Nick Tagataka, 27 Nov 2018Yeah, there would be a huge advantage in details for XZ2P/XZ3 if it didn't oversharpen the ima... moreSony having one sensor it's unbeatable in quality and versatility with XZ3.
Rq, 26 Nov 2018And where are the results of your test, and the published reviews? I can that the cows fly in ... moreMy best friend works in a repair service center and he have all the devices mentioned in its department. He nor I were interested to make videos. Only money intended or noobs need YouTube tests. Both we have Sony deveices. He have an XZ3 and I an XA2 ultra. Buy them and compare them then see for yourself and taste your insolence! Real life tests is the best experiences yet.
Shanti Dope, 26 Nov 2018There indeed is an oversharpening, but there's a definite detail even without it.
Apple's app... moreYeah, there would be a huge advantage in details for XZ2P/XZ3 if it didn't oversharpen the image so aggressively. There are scenes where oversharpening helps a bit, like a picture of an old building, but for things in nature such as trees, grass or flowers it can destroy a lot of fine textures. See FlashingDroid's photo comparison video to see what I'm on about.
As for the moving object: Modern smartphones with advanced HDR processing like iPhone XS a d Pixel 3 are really good at eliminating motion blur. If you look at the video I'm showing above you can see how iPhone is managing to "freeze" the scene just as well as XZ3 does, or it's even slightly better in some low light shots. And about the ISO performance: iPhone does considerably better when it comes to dealing with noise at the same ISO and about the same shutter speed. I know they are taken in completely different scenes, but at least you can have a rough idea on how those phones handle noise in low light.
Just look at the texture of the wall to see the difference in noise level. It's pretty astounding. And no, Sony DOES use multi-frame already in Xperia XZ series. They use a dedicated ISP to handle all the imaging tasks, called BionZ for Mobile, and it takes care of multi-frame noise reduction as well.
'Also, Apple keeps the image at low 12MP resolution to hide the lack of detail it has'
'both Apple and Sony process their images very well, except the latter isn't afraid of showing its full resolution'
That's just blatantly false and you're taking it other way around. Sony is the one who's not using the full 19MP and keeping the default image resolution at 12MP to make it look better due to downsampling. Apple is not afraid of outputting photos at full 12MP because they are confident that their photos look good even when you pixel peep(good for a phone, of course). And they DO look relatively natural compared to what XZ3 gives you, in terms of details and dynamic range.
Shanti Dope, 25 Nov 2018Well the main point of using Night Sight is to create a brighter image, and both just deliver ... moreNo, the point of Night Sight and Night Mode - at least for most end users is to capture low light photos that still look somewhat realistic. I doubt most people want a dimly lit bar to look like it's full of sunshine. Night Sight completely overblows photos. There is no excusing that. And no, I'd rather my photos to look right from the get-go rather than need post processing to tone down the exposure. If I want to do professional editing for my photos I'm going to bring my DSLR for a professional photo shoot. As I said, Night Mode does not make scenes as ridiculously processed looking as Night Sight. The bar photos and the set of outdoor photos right before the bar photos both show that Night Sight makes everything look waaaaaay too bright and processed. Must be the software ;)
Shanti Dope, 26 Nov 2018What do you mean you can't understand? He said it's a 68MP vs 12MP battle, but in reality, th... morePerhaps. Is it possible to simulate a telephoto Len's effects with just one sensor and managing to keep the same lossless quality?
They both doing a great job, cmon guys its a phone not a pro high end camera.
And for the children in here, go to bed and be fresh for school tomorrow... All this, mine is better then urs, mine is bigger then urs, copycat stuff yak yak yak, grow up... Its a damn phone.
Walter C. Dornez, 26 Nov 2018*reads all this*
Can you explain a little more?What do you mean you can't understand?
He said it's a 68MP vs 12MP battle, but in reality, the Mate 20 Pro doesn't use its wide angle lens and telephoto lens when taking a normal low light picture, so it's still a 40MP vs 12MP battle (or 10MP for Mate 20 Pro for software tricks).
As for Google, they could've simply used a larger sensor on that single camera to somehow compensate for the refusal of adding a secondary sensor.
Nick Tagataka, 26 Nov 2018I'm sorry to say this but XZ3's software processing still isn't that good. The amount of detai... moreThere indeed is an oversharpening, but there's a definite detail even without it.
Apple's approach to multi-frame is giving it an advantage in having the better dynamic range, but as per detail, the XZ3 clearly still defeats it by a margin. We simply cannot ignore that higher resolution of the sensor.
For ISO performance, Sony manages to perform better at higher ISO than their competitors.
They use longer shutter speed and rely on OIS, and it's a good thing; IF you're NOT shooting moving subjects, otherwise good luck trying to capture a moving car at night.
The XZ2 at ISO 3200 performs adequately as good as the iPhone XS at ISO 300 (similar level of noise and clarity of the image, but Apple used a longer shutter time).
Until Sony performs multi-frame, others will be a bit better in dynamic range, but even then, they aren't that far behind to their competitors, which means they could do even better than the rest if they perform it.
Also, Apple keeps the image at low 12MP resolution to hide the lack of detail it has. Anything at 12MP would look fine, and both Apple and Sony process their images very well, except the latter isn't afraid of showing its full resolution.
Take this, the XZ3's image will be better when shown on a large screen.