Apple iPhone 18 Pro Camera test
Apple’s iPhone 18 Pro camera test on DXOMARK has triggered debate over how much of its image quality gains come from better computational photography and denoising rather than major sensor upgrades. Commenters contrast Apple’s strengths in video and overall hardware–software integration with Huawei and other Android flagships that now appear to lead in still photos, often thanks to larger sensors and more aggressive AI processing. There is also scrutiny of the new variable aperture and bokeh quality, and skepticism about DXOMARK’s scoring methodology and the extent to which heavy post‑processing distorts “reality” in modern smartphone images.
Overall camera performance & rankings
- Many note the 18 Pro uses essentially the same sensor as prior models but with noticeably improved denoising, likely driven by the new NPU.
- Some say Apple is now slightly behind top Android flagships in stills, though still near the top; video is widely seen as where iPhone remains ahead.
- DXOMark’s list shows only a Huawei model ahead, but several commenters caution that such rankings emphasize versatility and predictability over “sheer performance.”
Computational photography, AI processing & artifacts
- Strong concern about heavy post‑processing: skin smoothing, “plastic” faces, and AI-like denoise/sharpen artifacts in portraits.
- Debate over whether Huawei’s sharpness comes from AI upscaling vs better hardware; some insist Chinese phones hallucinate detail (e.g., “fake moons”), others request concrete evidence for specific models.
- Several distinguish between “normal” computational fixes (exposure, noise) and AI upscaling that invents detail, worrying that reviewer pixel‑peeping incentivizes cheating.
Variable aperture, bokeh & depth of field
- Mixed views on the new variable aperture:
- Some see it as mainly a spec‑sheet feature; DoF still too deep to matter much aesthetically.
- Others highlight benefits for multi‑subject sharpness and video exposure (reducing the need for ND filters).
- Bokeh quality is called out as a weakness: ringed / “onion” bokeh reminiscent of cheap or vintage lenses, especially at the first stop down.
- Debate over causes (aperture blade design vs spherical aberration vs aspherics) and whether non‑experts care; several insist everyday users do notice “nice vs ugly” background blur.
DXOMark methodology & transparency
- Multiple commenters find the published review insufficiently scientific: vague language, few visible measurements, unclear scoring (e.g., “157 Portrait”).
- Links are shared to DXOMark’s protocol and older PDFs, with the note that more detailed data exist behind paywalls; some regret that mobile tests are less technical than “real camera” tests.
Comparisons, usability & video
- Chinese flagships (e.g., OPPO, Huawei, Xiaomi, vivo) are praised for stills and big sensors, but Apple is credited with a stronger integrated hardware/software stack and video quality.
- Complaints about iPhone white-balance “hunting” in video; the 18 Pro’s new built‑in “pro” controls for WB/shutter/aperture are welcomed.
- Several argue that above a certain level, recent flagships all look similar for typical use; for truly high image quality, a dedicated camera is still preferred.