DXOMark Mobile Phone Camera Quality of Results (the best known smarphone camera output QOR known to date)

[arlen holder]

Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
<https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>

#1 = Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus & Huawei Mate 20 Pro & Huawei P20 Pro
#2 = Xiaomi Mi 9
#3 = Apple iPhone XS Max
#4 = Samsung Galaxy Note 9 & Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 & HTC U12+
#5 = Huawei P20
#6 = Google Pixel 3 & Apple iPhone XR
#7 = Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus & Xiaomi Mi 8
#8 = Google Pixel 2 & OnePlus 6T
#9 = Xiaomi Mi MIX 2S & Apple iPhone X & Huawei Mate 10 Pro
#10 = OnePlus 6

The detailed itemized reviews are, of course, also on the web site.

--
If you know of even _better_ smartphone review sites, please post them so
that others benefit from your knowledge & wisdom.

[Alfred Molon]

In article <q6lueb$7ur$3...@news.mixmin.net>,
ar...@arlen.com says...

>
> Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
> <https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>
>
> #1 = Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus & Huawei Mate 20 Pro & Huawei P20 Pro
> #2 = Xiaomi Mi 9
> #3 = Apple iPhone XS Max
> #4 = Samsung Galaxy Note 9 & Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 & HTC U12+
> #5 = Huawei P20
> #6 = Google Pixel 3 & Apple iPhone XR
> #7 = Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus & Xiaomi Mi 8
> #8 = Google Pixel 2 & OnePlus 6T
> #9 = Xiaomi Mi MIX 2S & Apple iPhone X & Huawei Mate 10 Pro
> #10 = OnePlus 6
>
> The detailed itemized reviews are, of course, also on the web site.

Interesting that the Xiaomi phones are so good (even
better than the iphones).
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
https://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

[nospam]

In article <MPG.36fa11f55...@news.supernews.com>, Alfred

Molon <alfred...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
> > <https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>
> >
> > #1 = Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus & Huawei Mate 20 Pro & Huawei P20 Pro
> > #2 = Xiaomi Mi 9
> > #3 = Apple iPhone XS Max
> > #4 = Samsung Galaxy Note 9 & Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 & HTC U12+
> > #5 = Huawei P20
> > #6 = Google Pixel 3 & Apple iPhone XR
> > #7 = Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus & Xiaomi Mi 8
> > #8 = Google Pixel 2 & OnePlus 6T
> > #9 = Xiaomi Mi MIX 2S & Apple iPhone X & Huawei Mate 10 Pro
> > #10 = OnePlus 6
> >
> > The detailed itemized reviews are, of course, also on the web site.
>
> Interesting that the Xiaomi phones are so good (even
> better than the iphones).

dxo scores are completely meaningless and any differences among the
cameras are insignificant.

[David Taylor]

On 18/03/2019 19:37, Alfred Molon wrote:
> In article <q6lueb$7ur$3...@news.mixmin.net>,
> ar...@arlen.com says...
>>
>> Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
>> <https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>
>>
>> #1 = Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus & Huawei Mate 20 Pro & Huawei P20 Pro
>> #2 = Xiaomi Mi 9
>> #3 = Apple iPhone XS Max
>> #4 = Samsung Galaxy Note 9 & Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 & HTC U12+
>> #5 = Huawei P20
>> #6 = Google Pixel 3 & Apple iPhone XR
>> #7 = Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus & Xiaomi Mi 8
>> #8 = Google Pixel 2 & OnePlus 6T
>> #9 = Xiaomi Mi MIX 2S & Apple iPhone X & Huawei Mate 10 Pro
>> #10 = OnePlus 6
>>
>> The detailed itemized reviews are, of course, also on the web site.
>
> Interesting that the Xiaomi phones are so good (even
> better than the iphones).

I would include technical innovation and camera features in my decision
list, making my Pixel 3 #1 - LOL!

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

[sms]

On 3/18/2019 12:37 PM, Alfred Molon wrote:

<snip>

> Interesting that the Xiaomi phones are so good (even
> better than the iphones).

All the phone manufacturers are able to buy the same cameras and lenses
for their flagship phones. And the same screens and modems for that
matter. So it's not surprising how close these phones are.

My friend, a professional photographer and an Apple aficionado, has #3
on that list, a 512GB Xs Max. I have #4 on that list. If we traded
phones, his photographs would still be far better than mine.

Today I saw that the 512GB Samsung Note 9 is $749.99 at B&H
<https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1465768-REG> and it includes a
Samsung wireless charging pad (as well as the standard wired QC3.0 fast
charger). An iPhone Xs Max 512GB with a fast charger, wireless charging
pad, and USB-C to Lightning cable is $1,536.95 online (before tax). If I
spent $1536.95 on a phone I would end up spending a lot more on a
divorce lawyer. Even $750 is a lot to spend on a phone.

I know that some people correctly claim that you could buy a very good
compact camera for $750 (i.e. the Lumix TZ200) plus a $200 phone, and
end up with much better quality photos, but for a lot of people a phone
with a high-end camera is good enough and less hassle when traveling.

Also look at prices in relation to the score. The S10 Plus and the Xs
Max are the most expensive, the Xiaomi Mi 9 is the best deal if all you
care about is the camera.

Street $ per Model
DXOMark Price DXOMark
-------------------------------------------------------
Huawei Mate 20 Pro 128GB 109 816 7.49
Huawei P20 Pro 109 603 5.53
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus 109 1000 9.17
Xiaomi Mi 9 128GB 107 550 5.14
Apple iPhone XS Max 64GB 105 1099 10.47
HTC U12+ 128GB 103 699 6.79
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 512GB 103 750 7.28
Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 128GB 103 539 5.23
Huawei P20 12GB 102 603 5.91
Apple iPhone XR 64GB 101 749 7.42
Google Pixel 3 64GB 101 599 5.93


For phones officially sold in the U.S. and that will work on the top
tier carriers:

Street $ per Model
DXOMark Price DXOMark
-------------------------------------------------------
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus 109 1000 9.17
Apple iPhone XS Max 64GB 105 1099 10.47
HTC U12+ 128GB 103 699 6.79
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 512GB 103 750 7.28
Apple iPhone XR 64GB 101 749 7.42
Google Pixel 3 64GB 101 599 5.93


For phones officially sold in the U.S. and that will work on the top
tier carriers and that have a MicroSD card slot and a headphone jack:

Street $ per Model
DXOMark Price DXOMark
-------------------------------------------------------
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus 109 1000 9.17
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 512GB 103 750 7.28

[nospam]

In article <q6u5tl$hoj$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> > Interesting that the Xiaomi phones are so good (even
> > better than the iphones).
>
> All the phone manufacturers are able to buy the same cameras and lenses
> for their flagship phones. And the same screens and modems for that
> matter. So it's not surprising how close these phones are.

the parts are not exactly the same, particularly displays, but the real
difference for cameras are the isps.

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 12:56:33 -0700, sms wrote:

> All the phone manufacturers are able to buy the same cameras and lenses
> for their flagship phones. And the same screens and modems for that
> matter. So it's not surprising how close these phones are.

Hi Steve,
I agree with you that, if they don't make their own hardware, then they all
have access to essentially the same hardware.

> Today I saw that the 512GB Samsung Note 9 is $749.99 at B&H

Electronics generally follows the rule of better, faster, & cheaper.
o Of course, Apple tries, with marketing, to reverse that trend.

> An iPhone Xs Max 512GB with a fast charger, wireless charging
> pad, and USB-C to Lightning cable is $1,536.95 online (before tax).

Personally, I think Apple will fail to successfully maintain the current
stratospheric prices, particularly when the general public realizes the
mediocre performance of the Apple hardware (e.g., 5G) comes at an
astronomical price point.

> I know that some people correctly claim that you could buy a very good
> compact camera for $750 (i.e. the Lumix TZ200) plus a $200 phone, and
> end up with much better quality photos, but for a lot of people a phone
> with a high-end camera is good enough and less hassle when traveling.

I don't know if _any_ phone, what with that puny lens, could even approach
the versatility & quality of a similarly priced SLR. Can they?

To forestall nospam's incessantly idiotic worthless "yes", he'd have to
give examples in order to be believed (nospam is allergic to actual facts).

> For phones officially sold in the U.S. and that will work on the top

> tier carriers and that have a MicroSD card slot and a headphone jack.

Personally, the _lack_ of expansion memory & headphone jacks is a killer
loss of basic functionality found in _all_ iPhones, unfortunately.

Worse, the loss of removable batteries is happening even on Android.
o Luckily, Android phones generally have better batteries than iPhones
(in terms of the fact most current iPhone batteries are throttle "in about
a year").

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 20:18:28 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder wrote:

> Personally, the _lack_ of expansion memory & headphone jacks is a killer
> loss of basic functionality found in _all_ iPhones, unfortunately.

Before nospam gleefully jumps on that with his silly semantic games,
I correct a minor omission above...

Instead of... "the _lack_ of expansion memory & headphone jacks is a killer
loss of basic functionality found in _all_ iPhones, unfortunately..."

It should have been:

*The _lack_ of expansion memory & headphone jacks is a killer loss of
*basic functionality found in _current_ iPhones, unfortunately*

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 16:09:52 -0400, nospam wrote:

> the parts are not exactly the same, particularly displays, but the real
> difference for cameras are the isps.

Hi nospam,
Generally you say only what would be found in an Apple Marketing Playbook
o So it will be interesting how your words may match Apple Marketing Mantra

Image Signal Processor:
o Understanding Camera Optics & Smartphone Camera Trends
<https://www.anandtech.com/show/6777/understanding-camera-optics-smartphone-camera-trends/4>

"Your 8 MP CMOS doesn┤ sense red green and blue for each pixel, it
senses one color for each, then ISP guesses the color based on what┬
next to it. This is called demosaicing, and it┬ probably the primary
job of ISP, and there are many secret sauce methods to computing this
interpolated image. In addition ISP does all the other housekeeping, it
controls autofocus, exposure, and white balance for the camera system.
Recently correcting for lens imperfections like vignetting or color
shading imparted by the imperfect lens system has been added, along
with things like HDR recombining, noise reduction, other filtering, face
or object detection, and conversion between color spaces. There┬
variance between the features that ISP does, but this is really the
controller for getting that bayer data into a workable image array."

Apparently there are 2 (or 3) ISP camps, where we _begin_ to see if nospam,
predictably, pulls out a page directly from the Apple Marketing Playbook:
"There are two divergent camps in smartphone camera UX
*APPLE: Deliver almost no options*
APPLE: Let the ISP and software configure everything automatically
SAMSUNG: Offer nearly every option & toggle that makes sense to the user
HTC: somewhere in-between"

Since we often can read nospam's next move like the punchline of a Rodney
Dangerfield joke, it's a pretty good guess that nospam is in the camp of
whatever is in the Apple Marketing Playbook, which, according to the
reference above, is in letting the ISP do everything for the user (leaving
few to no options in the camera app itself).

[nospam]

In article <q6u8a8$ff6$1...@news.mixmin.net>, arlen holder

<ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

>
> > the parts are not exactly the same, particularly displays, but the real
> > difference for cameras are the isps.
>

> Generally you say only what would be found in an Apple Marketing Playbook
> o So it will be interesting how your words may match Apple Marketing Mantra

isps have nothing whatsoever to do with apple in particular.

> Image Signal Processor:
> o Understanding Camera Optics & Smartphone Camera Trends
>
> <https://www.anandtech.com/show/6777/understanding-camera-optics-smartphone-ca
> mera-trends/4>

that's a 5 year old article. a lot has changed since then.

> "Your 8 MP CMOS doesn┤ sense red green and blue for each pixel, it
> senses one color for each, then ISP guesses the color based on what┬
> next to it.

it doesn't guess, plus that's how almost all camera sensors work.

> This is called demosaicing, and it┬ probably the primary
> job of ISP,

that's actually a very minor part of the isp.

portrait mode, night sight, panorama stitching, stabilization and
various other effects are what sets one isp apart from another.

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 20:37:29 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder wrote:

> *APPLE: Deliver almost no options*

> SAMSUNG: Offer nearly every option & toggle that makes sense to the user

A key question for this rec.photo.digital newsgroup to answer might be...
o What "secret sauce" does _any_ smartphone maker have on the other,
in terms of ISP technology?

Regarding a further quick look at this dichotomy related to rec.photo.digital...
o Apple: Deliver almost no options
o Samsung: Offer nearly every option & toggle that makes user sense

This 2017 article says that ARM is providing the ISP to others:
<https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/27/15449146/arm-mali-c71-isp-mobile-photography>
"In terms of integration into a mobile chip, the ISP is little
different to ARM's GPU designs. A silicon vendor licenses the
intellectual property from ARM and then works to integrate the ISP
into its system-on-a-chip design, which would also include the
various CPU and GPU cores as well as power management and other
integrated parts. Then a smartphone maker can just order an
all-in-one solution to build a new smartphone or tablet device
around: CPU, GPU, and ISP all nicely tucked into the same chip. "

While Samsung touts its ISP technology:
<https://www.samsung.com/semiconductor/minisite/exynos/technology/advanced-isp/>
and while I'm sure Apple does too...
<https://9to5mac.com/2017/11/09/apple-invisage-acquisition/>

A quick look shows other big names making and/or selling ISP tech:
ST: <https://www.st.com/b/en/imaging-and-photonics-solutions/imaging-processors.html>
Intel: <https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/guides/atom-3800-isp-driver-user-guide.pdf>
Thine: <https://www.thine.co.jp/en/products/pr_details/Image-Signal-Processor.html>
etc.

Since I suspect nospam will merely parrot what he finds in an Apple
Marketing Playbook, a quick look to see what Apple has by way of ISP
technology (over Samsung, for example), doesn't seem to show any "secret
sauce" on the part of Apple, other than the Apple-standard predilection of
removing options from the user versus the Samsung philosophy of offering
every useful tweak and setting to the user.

Since I make no claims to be a camera expert, I ask the actual photography
experts here to weigh in on what 'secret sauce' either Samsung, Apple, or
Arm would have on the other, in terms of current smartphone ISPs.

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 16:56:23 -0400, nospam wrote:

> that's how almost all camera sensors work.

Hi nospam,

This is a thread on the QOR of the top ten cameras, where you brought up
the ISP, not me.

My question to the rec.photo.digital enthusiasts is simply
o What "secret sauce" (if any) does _any_ smartphone maker have on the
others, in terms of how ISP technology affects the final quality of result
that DXOMark analyzes in gory detail?

If there is no 'secret sauce', then the differential importance of the ISP
drops to insignificance, for example.

If there is a secret sauce, then, depending on what that secret sauce is,
the ISP perhaps "could" result in a final QOR differential.

[arlen holder]

On Sun, 17 Mar 2019 16:59:56 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder wrote:

> Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
> <https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>
>
> #1 = Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus & Huawei Mate 20 Pro & Huawei P20 Pro
> #2 = Xiaomi Mi 9
> #3 = Apple iPhone XS Max
> #4 = Samsung Galaxy Note 9 & Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 & HTC U12+
> #5 = Huawei P20
> #6 = Google Pixel 3 & Apple iPhone XR
> #7 = Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus & Xiaomi Mi 8
> #8 = Google Pixel 2 & OnePlus 6T
> #9 = Xiaomi Mi MIX 2S & Apple iPhone X & Huawei Mate 10 Pro
> #10 = OnePlus 6

Current top ten as of today:
#1 Samsung Galaxy S10 5G & Huawei P30 Pro
#2 Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus & Huawei Mate 20 Pro & Huawei P20 Pro
#3 Xiaomi Mi 9
#4 Apple iPhone XS Max
#5 Samsung Galaxy Note 9 & Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 & HTC U12+
#6 Huawei P20
#7 Google Pixel 3 & Apple iPhone XR
#8 Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus & Xiaomi Mi 8
#9 Google Pixel 2 & OnePlus 6T
#10 Xiaomi Mi MIX 2S & Huawei Mate 10 Pro & Apple iPhone X

<https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>

[RichA]

Where they all shot at some ridiculously low ISO, like 32?

[David Taylor]

Not everyone wants pin-sharp 20 x 30 prints, Rich. Perhaps not for you,
but for very many the better smart-phones are now quite adequate in many
circumstances (this from a previously full-frame Kodachrome DSLR user).

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sun, 17 Mar 2019 16:59:56 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder wrote:

DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of today, 10/25/2019
<https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>

Top Ten:
o 1 Huawei Mate 30 Pro (121)
o 2 Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G (117)
o 3 Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ (117)
o 4 Huawei P30 Pro (116)
o 5 Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (116)
o 6 OnePlus 7 Pro (114)
o 7 Honor 20 Pro (113)
o 8 Samsung Galaxy S10+ (113)
o 9 Google Pixel 4 (112)
o 10 Huawei Mate 20 Pro (112)

All the rest:
o 11 Xiaomi Mi 9 (110)
o 12 Huawei P20 Pro (109)
o 13 Apple iPhone XS Max (106)
o 14 Asus ZenFone 6 (104)
o 15 HTC U12+ (103)
o 16 Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (103)
o 17 Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 (103)
o 18 Google Pixel 3 (102)
o 19 Xiaomi Redmi K20 Pro (102)
o 20 Apple iPhone XR (101)
o 21 Google Pixel 3a (100)
o 22 Google Pixel 2 (99)
o 23 LG G8 ThinQ (99)
o 24 Samsung Galaxy S9+ (99)
o 25 Xiaomi Mi 8 (99)
o 26 OnePlus 6T (98)
o 27 Apple iPhone X (97)
o 28 Huawei Mate 10 Pro (97)
o 29 Lenovo Z6 Pro (97)
o 30 OnePlus 6 (96)
o 31 Apple iPhone 8 Plus (94)
o 32 LG V40 ThinQ (94)
o 33 Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (94)
o 34 Sony Xperia 1 (94)
o 35 Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (91)
o 36 Asus ZenFone 5 (90)
o 37 General Mobile GM9 Pro (90)
o 38 Google Pixel (90)
o 39 HTC U11 (90)
o 40 Vivo X20 Plus (90)
o 41 Xiaomi Mi Note 3 (90)
o 42 Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge (89)
o 43 Apple iPhone 7 Plus (88)
o 44 Samsung Galaxy A9 (86)
o 45 Crosscall Trekker-X4 (85)
o 46 Nokia 9 PureView (85)
o 47 Samsung Galaxy A50 (85)
o 48 LG G7 ThinQ (83)
o 49 LG V30 (82)
o 50 Motorola Moto Z2 Force (82)
o 51 Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge (82)
o 52 Motorola Moto G7 Plus (80)
o 53 Apple iPhone 6 (73)
o 54 Google Nexus 6P (73)
o 55 Meizu Pro 7 Plus (71)
o 56 Lava Z25 (70)
o 57 Samsung Galaxy S5 (70)
o 58 Motorola Moto G5S (69)
o 59 Apple iPhone 5s (68)
o 60 Nokia 8 (68)
o 61 Samsung Galaxy J2 Pro (2018) (65)
o 62 Altice S61 (56)

--

[Arlen Holder]

<https://www.dxomark.com/category/smartphone-reviews/>
(as of November 19th, 2019)

Top dozen camera quality of results in detailed independent tests:
o 01 Huawei Mate 30 Pro (121) (93)
o 02 Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro Premium Edition (121)
o 03 Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (117) (71)
o 04 Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G (117) (99) (66)
o 05 Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ (117) (66)
o 06 Huawei P30 Pro (116) (89)
o 07 Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (116) (97)
o 08 OnePlus 7 Pro (114) (86)
o 09 Honor 20 Pro (113) (85) (53)
o 10 Samsung Galaxy S10+ (113) (96) (65)
o 11 Google Pixel 4 (112) (92)
o 12 Huawei Mate 20 Pro (112) (75)

All the rest:
o 13 Xiaomi Mi 9 (110)
o 14 Huawei P20 Pro (109) (72)
o 15 Apple iPhone XS Max (106) (82) (74)
o 16 Asus ZenFone 6 (104) (98)
o 17 HTC U12+ (103)
o 18 Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (103) (92)
o 19 Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 (103) (84)
o 20 Google Pixel 3 (102) (92)
o 21 Xiaomi Redmi K20 Pro (102)
o 22 Apple iPhone XR (101*)
o 23 Google Pixel 3a (100*)
o 24 Google Pixel 2 (99) (77)
o 25 LG G8 ThinQ (99)
o 26 Samsung Galaxy S9+ (99*) (81)
o 27 Xiaomi Mi 8 (99*)
o 28 OnePlus 6T (98*)
o 29 Apple iPhone X (97) (71)
o 30 Huawei Mate 10 Pro (97*)
o 31 Lenovo Z6 Pro (97) (75)
o 32 OnePlus 6 (96*)
o 33 Apple iPhone 8 Plus (94)
o 34 LG V40 ThinQ (94*)
o 35 Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (94*)
o 36 Sony Xperia 1 (94) (78) (45)
o 37 Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (91*)
o 38 Asus ZenFone 5 (90*)
o 39 General Mobile GM9 Pro (90)
o 40 Google Pixel (90)
o 41 HTC U11 (90*)
o 42 Vivo X20 Plus (90*)
o 43 Xiaomi Mi Note 3 (90*)
o 44 Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge (89*)
o 45 Apple iPhone 7 Plus (88)
o 46 Samsung Galaxy A9 (86*)
o 47 Crosscall Trekker-X4 (85*)
o 48 Nokia 9 PureView (85)
o 49 Samsung Galaxy A50 (85)
o 50 Black Shark 2 (84)
o 51 LG G7 ThinQ (83*)
o 52 LG V30 (82*)
o 53 Motorola Moto Z2 Force (82*)
o 54 Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge (82*)
o 55 Motorola Moto G7 Plus (80)
o 56 Apple iPhone 6 (73*)
o 57 Google Nexus 6P (73*)
o 58 Meizu Pro 7 Plus (71*)
o 59 Lava Z25 (70*)
o 60 Samsung Galaxy S5 (70*)
o 61 Motorola Moto G5S (69*)
o 62 Apple iPhone 5s (68)
o 63 Nokia 8 (68*)
o 64 Wiko View 3 Pro (67)
o 65 Fairphone 3 (66)
o 66 Samsung Galaxy J2 Pro (2018) (65*)
o 67 Altice S61 (56)

[Chris Green]

Arlen Holder <arlen.geo...@is.invalid> wrote:
> <https://www.dxomark.com/category/smartphone-reviews/>
> (as of November 19th, 2019)
>

What manufacturers' smartphones are included in the tests?

--
Chris Green
·

[nospam]

In article <f77dag-...@esprimo.zbmc.eu>, Chris Green <c...@isbd.net>

wrote:

> > <https://www.dxomark.com/category/smartphone-reviews/>
> > (as of November 19th, 2019)
> >
> What manufacturers' smartphones are included in the tests?

the ones that paid dxo.

[Arlen Holder]

On Tue, 19 Nov 2019 08:34:37 -0500, nospam wrote:

>>> <https://www.dxomark.com/category/smartphone-reviews/>
>>> (as of November 19th, 2019)
>>>
>> What manufacturers' smartphones are included in the tests?
>
> the ones that paid dxo.

Tthese two dozen manufacturers are listed in the sixty seven tests
(average of 3 devices per manufacturer).
o Altice
o Apple
o Asus
o Black
o Crosscall
o Fairphone
o General
o Google
o HTC
o Honor
o Huawei
o LG
o Lava
o Lenovo
o Meizu
o Motorola
o Nokia
o OnePlus
o Samsung
o Sony
o Vivo
o Wiko
o Xiaomi

While I note that my $130 LG Stylo 3 Plus is, unfortunately not
represented, what manufacturers are people asking for that aren't listed?

As for nospam's constant baseless fabrications, it just proves again:
o The problem with apologists is they have no adult response to fact.

In fact, nospam has only 7 basic responses to facts he doesn't like:
o What are the common well-verified psychological traits of the Apple Apologists on this newsgroup?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/18ARDsEOPzM/veU8FwAjBQAJ>

If nospam feels there is valid evidence DXOmark is being paid...
o Name just one

It's what an adult would do.

NOTE: The fact nospam is incessantly fabricating imaginary happenings is
always in relation to the fact that nospam never seems to have any adult
response to facts he simply doesn't like.
o Why do the apologists like nospam turn into instant children in the face of mere facts (e.g., ftfy)?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/TZbkkqS3jv4/3_TTHgRpBwAJ>

The child-like response nospam most often comes up with in response to
facts he hates is that he conjures up completely baseless utter
fabrications sans a shred of proof, which is nospam's specialty, just as
it's the specialty of the fifth-grade bullies I confront often at schools
that I substitute teach at.

In fact, I've nicknamed a particularly pernicious fourth-grade bully
"nospam", simply because every time he's involved in an altercation, he
fabricates baseless accusations, just as nospam always does, where he has
no concept of the fact that nobody believes a word he says, since he can
never back up his fabricated claims, with even a _single_ fact.

Nospam is so addicted to baseless fabrications that he incessantly
fabricates conversations that never happened, just so that he can respond
to them with his always in-the-fifth-grade concept of a witty retort.
o Why do Jolly Roger & nospam always FABRICATE conversations?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/GExRc1qrFGo/JBzdCKSSAwAJ>

--
Usenet is a potluck where ADULTS are expected to publicly share useful
items of value to the group overall.

[Whisky-dave]

On Tuesday, 19 November 2019 14:21:33 UTC, Arlen Holder wrote:


>
> If nospam feels there is valid evidence DXOmark is being paid...
> o Name just one

Who pays DXOmark to do it someone must get paid surely or does everyone work for nothing.
How to they aqurie all these phones to test, are they given one to test and then return it or do they get to keep it.
Do they just test a phone once or many times ?

> It's what an adult would do.

An adult would try to work out why someone would test dozens of phones every month or so without being paid.

> The child-like response nospam most often comes up with in response to
> facts he hates is that he conjures up completely baseless utter
> fabrications sans a shred of proof, which is nospam's specialty, just as
> it's the specialty of the fifth-grade bullies I confront often at schools
> that I substitute teach at.

What do you do to confront bullies ?
How do we know they are bullying you or anyone.

> In fact, I've nicknamed a particularly pernicious fourth-grade bully
> "nospam", simply because every time he's involved in an altercation, he
> fabricates baseless accusations, just as nospam always does, where he has
> no concept of the fact that nobody believes a word he says, since he can
> never back up his fabricated claims, with even a _single_ fact.

Well you could actually find out whether anyone gets paid for testing or prove that they are doing it for the love of it.
Most peolpe get paid for doing jobs, the only things people don't normally get paid to do are called hobbies or is it slavery.

[Eric Stevens]

On Tue, 19 Nov 2019 08:54:20 -0800 (PST), Whisky-dave
<whisk...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, 19 November 2019 14:21:33 UTC, Arlen Holder wrote:
>
>
>>
>> If nospam feels there is valid evidence DXOmark is being paid...
>> o Name just one
>
>Who pays DXOmark to do it someone must get paid surely or does everyone work for nothing.
>How to they aqurie all these phones to test, are they given one to test and then return it or do they get to keep it.
>Do they just test a phone once or many times ?

I suppose that, like any commercial lab, they will a fixed scale of
charges for both time and standard tests.

>
>> It's what an adult would do.
>
>An adult would try to work out why someone would test dozens of phones every month or so without being paid.
>
>
>
>> The child-like response nospam most often comes up with in response to
>> facts he hates is that he conjures up completely baseless utter
>> fabrications sans a shred of proof, which is nospam's specialty, just as
>> it's the specialty of the fifth-grade bullies I confront often at schools
>> that I substitute teach at.
>
>What do you do to confront bullies ?
>How do we know they are bullying you or anyone.
>
>
>
>> In fact, I've nicknamed a particularly pernicious fourth-grade bully
>> "nospam", simply because every time he's involved in an altercation, he
>> fabricates baseless accusations, just as nospam always does, where he has
>> no concept of the fact that nobody believes a word he says, since he can
>> never back up his fabricated claims, with even a _single_ fact.
>
>Well you could actually find out whether anyone gets paid for testing or prove that they are doing it for the love of it.
>Most peolpe get paid for doing jobs, the only things people don't normally get paid to do are called hobbies or is it slavery.

Seek and ye shall find:

https://www.androidauthority.com/dxomark-ranking-troublesome-805633/

"DxO Labs, the company which runs the DxOMark testing suite, is
primarily a consultancy company. In other words, the company
charges fees to advise camera hardware companies on how to improve
their photography products."

... for whatever that is worth.


>
>
>

--


Eric Stevens

There are two classes of people. Those who divide people into
two classes and those who don't. I belong to the second class.

[nospam]

In article <9gu9te97prjh79odg...@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens

<eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:

> >Well you could actually find out whether anyone gets paid for testing or
> >prove that they are doing it for the love of it.
> >Most peolpe get paid for doing jobs, the only things people don't normally
> >get paid to do are called hobbies or is it slavery.
>
> Seek and ye shall find:
>
> https://www.androidauthority.com/dxomark-ranking-troublesome-805633/
>
> "DxO Labs, the company which runs the DxOMark testing suite, is
> primarily a consultancy company. In other words, the company
> charges fees to advise camera hardware companies on how to improve
> their photography products."
>
> ... for whatever that is worth.

keep reading.

However, manufacturers that tune their cameras against the testing
suite are likely to score higher than those who donšt. We have heard
that a few smartphone manufacturers donšt think DxOšs consultancy
fees are worthwhile. These manufacturers donšt score highly on DxOšs
tests, if the company even reviews these phones at all.
...
Those who pay to work closely with DxOMark will likely score more
highly in the companyšs tests, which is then quoted by many other
review sites. Therešs pressure on smartphone OEMs to pay for DxOšs
services simply for the press recognition.

[Whisky-dave]

On Wednesday, 20 November 2019 08:37:20 UTC, Eric Stevens wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Nov 2019 08:54:20 -0800 (PST), Whisky-dave
> <whisk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, 19 November 2019 14:21:33 UTC, Arlen Holder wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >> If nospam feels there is valid evidence DXOmark is being paid...
> >> o Name just one
> >
> >Who pays DXOmark to do it someone must get paid surely or does everyone work for nothing.
> >How to they aqurie all these phones to test, are they given one to test and then return it or do they get to keep it.
> >Do they just test a phone once or many times ?
>
> I suppose that, like any commercial lab, they will a fixed scale of
> charges for both time and standard tests.

Yes they probabbly do, but who pays, who parts with their hard earned or not so hard earned cash.

In the UK we too have online reviews and previously magazine (hard copy) and in the past these were paid for by advertisers and if a product got low marks that meant that fewer would buy it and hence it'd be less worth paying for it to be advertised. So sometimes you;d find that if a company offred their product for testing it might come with a note saying if this gets a good review it;d be worth us advertising in your mag. so you can see a certain incentive to give some products higher scores than they might deserve.
It's even worse with todays world on some sites including facebook where you can hire professional reviewers to like your products for a fee of so many likes per $ or £.
In the UK we have Which, but YOU have to pay a subscription for it, so they don;t need money from advertisors.
But I still prefer to see the actual pictures used for their tests any tests rather than they just give you a mark out of 10 as I know how that can be distorted, this was especially true in the which reviews on the value for money mark, so I tended to ignore that score/mark.

> >> It's what an adult would do.
> >
> >An adult would try to work out why someone would test dozens of phones every month or so without being paid.
> >
> >
> >
> >> The child-like response nospam most often comes up with in response to
> >> facts he hates is that he conjures up completely baseless utter
> >> fabrications sans a shred of proof, which is nospam's specialty, just as
> >> it's the specialty of the fifth-grade bullies I confront often at schools
> >> that I substitute teach at.
> >
> >What do you do to confront bullies ?
> >How do we know they are bullying you or anyone.
> >
> >
> >
> >> In fact, I've nicknamed a particularly pernicious fourth-grade bully
> >> "nospam", simply because every time he's involved in an altercation, he
> >> fabricates baseless accusations, just as nospam always does, where he has
> >> no concept of the fact that nobody believes a word he says, since he can
> >> never back up his fabricated claims, with even a _single_ fact.
> >
> >Well you could actually find out whether anyone gets paid for testing or prove that they are doing it for the love of it.
> >Most peolpe get paid for doing jobs, the only things people don't normally get paid to do are called hobbies or is it slavery.
>
> Seek and ye shall find:
>
> https://www.androidauthority.com/dxomark-ranking-troublesome-805633/

Which shows you shouldn't just takes these things as Gospel unless it's in the Bible of course ;-)

>
> "DxO Labs, the company which runs the DxOMark testing suite, is
> primarily a consultancy company. In other words, the company
> charges fees to advise camera hardware companies on how to improve
> their photography products."
>
> ... for whatever that is worth.

Yes it's a bit vague

>
>
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
>
>
> Eric Stevens
>
> There are two classes of people. Those who divide people into
> two classes and those who don't. I belong to the second class.

and I'm a first class person and far to elite to be put in a class with anyone else. :-)

[Eric Stevens]

On Wed, 20 Nov 2019 03:43:06 -0800 (PST), Whisky-dave

<whisk...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, 20 November 2019 08:37:20 UTC, Eric Stevens wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Nov 2019 08:54:20 -0800 (PST), Whisky-dave
>> <whisk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tuesday, 19 November 2019 14:21:33 UTC, Arlen Holder wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> If nospam feels there is valid evidence DXOmark is being paid...
>> >> o Name just one
>> >
>> >Who pays DXOmark to do it someone must get paid surely or does everyone work for nothing.
>> >How to they aqurie all these phones to test, are they given one to test and then return it or do they get to keep it.
>> >Do they just test a phone once or many times ?
>>
>> I suppose that, like any commercial lab, they will a fixed scale of
>> charges for both time and standard tests.
>
>Yes they probabbly do, but who pays, who parts with their hard earned or not so hard earned cash.
>
>In the UK we too have online reviews and previously magazine (hard copy) and in the past these were paid for by advertisers and if a product got low marks that meant that fewer would buy it and hence it'd be less worth paying for it to be advertised. So sometimes you;d find that if a company offred their product for testing it might come with a note saying if this gets a good review it;d be worth us advertising in your mag. so you can see a certain incentive to give some products higher scores than they might deserve.
>It's even worse with todays world on some sites including facebook where you can hire professional reviewers to like your products for a fee of so many likes per $ or £.
>In the UK we have Which, but YOU have to pay a subscription for it, so they don;t need money from advertisors.
>But I still prefer to see the actual pictures used for their tests any tests rather than they just give you a mark out of 10 as I know how that can be distorted, this was especially true in the which reviews on the value for money mark, so I tended to ignore that score/mark.
>

For more than forty years a large part of my workload entailed the
analysis of various accidents and failures for insurance companies. I
charged for this on a time and expenses basis. Sometimes the insurance
company loved my report. Other times they hated it and buried it in a
back file somewhere. But they all paid my bill.

I would be surprised if DxOMark operated on any other basis. Good news
or bad news, we will give it to you along with our bill. After all,
insurance companies and camera manufacturers both want to know whether
or not they have a winner or a lemon on their hands.

--- snip ---

[Whisky-dave]

Insurance companies are honest to their customers.......

I'll have to try to remember that and not to laugh.

You said if they hated it they buried it so what does that actually mean in the real world. ?

[Eric Stevens]

On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 02:47:19 -0800 (PST), Whisky-dave

They hated it if, as happened several times, my report got into the
hands of the opposition who then called me as a witness.

[Whisky-dave]

Doesn't prove anything though does it.

Who supplies DxOMark with the camera ?

[Eric Stevens]

On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 02:53:30 -0800 (PST), Whisky-dave

Not what I call proof but it certainly is a demonstration of
independence.

>
>Who supplies DxOMark with the camera ?
>

Whoever wants it tested.

[nospam]

In article <2pfrtelg03iqsnhv3...@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens

<eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:

> >Who supplies DxOMark with the camera ?
> >
> Whoever wants it tested.

that doesn't mean they'll test it

[Savageduck]

On Nov 26, 2019, Eric Stevens wrote
(in article<2pfrtelg03iqsnhv3...@4ax.com>):

Send them a Fujifilm X-Pro3 and see what happens.

...or ask them for any results for any Fujifilm X, or GFX cameras, XF, or GF
lenses.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

[Eric Stevens]

You already know that they have reasons why will/cannot test them. In
the same fashion, I have had would-be clients for whom I would not
work. Rejection of a client doesn't prove anything.

[Savageduck]

On Nov 27, 2019, Eric Stevens wrote
(in article<ds0utehu5cefdlon9...@4ax.com>):

> On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:49:39 -0800, Savageduck
> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 26, 2019, Eric Stevens wrote
> > (in article<2pfrtelg03iqsnhv3...@4ax.com>):
> >
> > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 02:53:30 -0800 (PST), Whisky-dave
> > > <whisk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Doesn't prove anything though does it.
> > >
> > > Not what I call proof but it certainly is a demonstration of
> > > independence.
> > > >
> > > > Who supplies DxOMark with the camera ?
> > > Whoever wants it tested.
> >
> > Send them a Fujifilm X-Pro3 and see what happens.
> >
> > ...or ask them for any results for any Fujifilm X, or GFX cameras, XF, or GF
> > lenses.
>
> You already know that they have reasons why will/cannot test them. In
> the same fashion, I have had would-be clients for whom I would not
> work. Rejection of a client doesn't prove anything.

Rejection by DxOMark because they lack the capability to conduct tests on a
particular sensor design places their methodology into question when it comes
to creating comparative test results for the entire market.

It is certainly not a valid rejection when Fujifilm also produces Bayer
sensor cameras which are within the capability of DxOMark to test. I doubt
that they have a valid reason to reject MF Bayer sensor cameras such as the
GFX 50S, GFX 50S, and GFX100 and the GF lenses. They are rejecting the entire
current product of a manufacturer not just a camera line with a sensor they
are incapable of testing.

At least having those cameras on their test bench would also give them the
ability to test X-mount, and GX-mount lenses. It proves that they are not all
encompassing when it comes to testing all aspects of the market. it also
proves that theirs is not a level playing field when it comes to making valid
comparisons against all players in the digital photography market.

...but I guess you are correct, any potential client, (Note: Fujifilm does
not seem to be any sort of client, but Sony certainly is) can be turned away
for any reason.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

[nospam]

In article <0001HW.238F504B06...@news.giganews.com>,

Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> > > Send them a Fujifilm X-Pro3 and see what happens.
> > >
> > > ...or ask them for any results for any Fujifilm X, or GFX cameras, XF, or
> > > GF
> > > lenses.
> >
> > You already know that they have reasons why will/cannot test them. In
> > the same fashion, I have had would-be clients for whom I would not
> > work. Rejection of a client doesn't prove anything.
>
> Rejection by DxOMark because they lack the capability to conduct tests on a
> particular sensor design places their methodology into question when it comes
> to creating comparative test results for the entire market.

yep.

> It is certainly not a valid rejection when Fujifilm also produces Bayer
> sensor cameras which are within the capability of DxOMark to test. I doubt
> that they have a valid reason to reject MF Bayer sensor cameras such as the
> GFX 50S, GFX 50S, and GFX100 and the GF lenses. They are rejecting the entire
> current product of a manufacturer not just a camera line with a sensor they
> are incapable of testing.
>
> At least having those cameras on their test bench would also give them the
> ability to test X-mount, and GX-mount lenses. It proves that they are not all
> encompassing when it comes to testing all aspects of the market. it also
> proves that theirs is not a level playing field when it comes to making valid
> comparisons against all players in the digital photography market.
>
> ...but I guess you are correct, any potential client, (Note: Fujifilm does
> not seem to be any sort of client, but Sony certainly is) can be turned away
> for any reason.

money talks. they're a lot less likely to reject a paying client.

[Whisky-dave]

On Wednesday, 27 November 2019 23:17:58 UTC, Eric Stevens wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:49:39 -0800, Savageduck
> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
> >On Nov 26, 2019, Eric Stevens wrote
> >(in article<2pfrtelg03iqsnhv3...@4ax.com>):
> >
> >> On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 02:53:30 -0800 (PST), Whisky-dave
> >> <whisk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Doesn't prove anything though does it.
> >>
> >> Not what I call proof but it certainly is a demonstration of
> >> independence.
> >> >
> >> > Who supplies DxOMark with the camera ?
> >> Whoever wants it tested.
> >
> >Send them a Fujifilm X-Pro3 and see what happens.
> >
> >...or ask them for any results for any Fujifilm X, or GFX cameras, XF, or GF
> >lenses.
>
> You already know that they have reasons why will/cannot test them.

I don't unless it's because some cameras or lenses are impossible to test.

> In
> the same fashion, I have had would-be clients for whom I would not
> work.

And why wouldn;t yuo work for them, is it that they won;t pay yuo enough or you have some sort of moral objection to working for them which can be understanable.
But I can't think of a moral reason for not testing a particular camera.
Well unless the camera was made from unicorn skins or somnething.

>Rejection of a client doesn't prove anything.

It certainly can though.
If a patient went to a doctor and said can you do these tests, he either can or can't. Whether they are black, white or what political party they support shouldn't be a reason.
It's a F'ing camera it produces an image so why can't they test an image ?

>
> --
>
>
> Eric Stevens
>
> There are two classes of people. Those who divide people into
> two classes and those who don't. I belong to the second class.

Are there two classess of camera testers, those that can test cameras and those that can't ?

[Eric Stevens]

On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 16:46:03 -0800, Savageduck

There must be a reason. I doubt if any of us know why and all we can
do is speculate. One possibility is that DxOMark and Fuji jave fallen
out for some reason. It's quite on the cards.

>
>At least having those cameras on their test bench would also give them the
>ability to test X-mount, and GX-mount lenses. It proves that they are not all
>encompassing when it comes to testing all aspects of the market. it also
>proves that theirs is not a level playing field when it comes to making valid
>comparisons against all players in the digital photography market.
>
>...but I guess you are correct, any potential client, (Note: Fujifilm does
>not seem to be any sort of client, but Sony certainly is) can be turned away
>for any reason.

Yep.

Have you watched Ford vs Ferrari? You will have seen there how big
egos can get in the way of common sense.

[nospam]

In article <knn0uehdg3jkgvmse...@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens

<eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:

> >Rejection by DxOMark because they lack the capability to conduct tests on a
> >particular sensor design places their methodology into question when it
> >comes
> >to creating comparative test results for the entire market.
> >
> >It is certainly not a valid rejection when Fujifilm also produces Bayer
> >sensor cameras which are within the capability of DxOMark to test. I doubt
> >that they have a valid reason to reject MF Bayer sensor cameras such as the
> >GFX 50S, GFX 50S, and GFX100 and the GF lenses. They are rejecting the
> >entire
> >current product of a manufacturer not just a camera line with a sensor they
> >are incapable of testing.
>
> There must be a reason. I doubt if any of us know why and all we can
> do is speculate. One possibility is that DxOMark and Fuji jave fallen
> out for some reason. It's quite on the cards.

$$$

[Whisky-dave]

Some speculations will be better than others.

> One possibility is that DxOMark and Fuji jave fallen
> out for some reason. It's quite on the cards.

what does a falling out have to do with checking the quality/specs of cameras ?

Perhaps it's like here where only women seem to have the option or working a 4 day week and work from home on the 5th day, we call it equality.
If only us male members of staff hard better legs and virginas perhaps then we'd get jobs as personal assistants as well.

> >At least having those cameras on their test bench would also give them the
> >ability to test X-mount, and GX-mount lenses. It proves that they are not all
> >encompassing when it comes to testing all aspects of the market. it also
> >proves that theirs is not a level playing field when it comes to making valid
> >comparisons against all players in the digital photography market.
> >
> >...but I guess you are correct, any potential client, (Note: Fujifilm does
> >not seem to be any sort of client, but Sony certainly is) can be turned away
> >for any reason.
>
> Yep.
>
> Have you watched Ford vs Ferrari?

I've heard a bit about it, but I'm not sure if egos do win such races.

>You will have seen there how big
> egos can get in the way of common sense.

So perhaps that is DxOMarks problem, if it has fallen out and perhaps it has to a lesser extent fallen out with Apple or has a 'relationship with google (or other manufacter) so it has a more generious marking system for those products.

So unless I have some understanding of who pays DxOMark for doing the btesting and who provides them with their sample products, I'd rather watch youtube vids of joe bloggs putting devices side by side showing the tests and giving their obviously personal comments.

[Arlen Holder]

Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
<https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>

The detailed itemized reviews are, of course, also on the web site.

o If you know of a _better_ comprehensive set of reviews, name it.

*Top Ten smartphone camera by quality of results:*
o 01 Huawei Mate 30 Pro 5G (123)
o 02 Huawei Mate 30 Pro (121)
o 03 Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro Premium Edition (121)
o 04 Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (117)
o 05 Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G (117)
o 06 Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ (117)
o 07 Huawei P30 Pro (116)
o 08 Oppo Reno 10x Zoom (116)
o 09 Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (116)
o 10 OnePlus 7 Pro (114)

*All the rest:*
o 11 Honor 20 Pro (113)
o 12 Samsung Galaxy S10+ (113)
o 13 Google Pixel 4 (112)
o 14 Huawei Mate 20 Pro (112)
o 15 Xiaomi Mi 9 (110)
o 16 Huawei P20 Pro (109)
o 17 Apple iPhone XS Max (106)
o 18 Asus ZenFone 6 (104)
o 19 HTC U12+ (103)
o 20 Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (103)
o 21 Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 (103)
o 22 Google Pixel 3 (102)
o 23 Xiaomi Redmi K20 Pro (102)
o 24 Apple iPhone XR (101)
o 25 Google Pixel 3a (101)
o 26 Samsung Galaxy S9+ (100)
o 27 Google Pixel 2 (99)
o 28 LG G8 ThinQ (99)
o 29 Xiaomi Mi 8 (99)
o 30 OnePlus 6T (98)
o 31 Apple iPhone X (97)
o 32 Huawei Mate 10 Pro (97)
o 33 Lenovo Z6 Pro (97)
o 34 OnePlus 6 (96)
o 35 Apple iPhone 8 Plus (94)
o 36 LG V40 ThinQ (94)
o 37 Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (94)
o 38 Sony Xperia 1 (94)
o 39 Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (91)
o 40 Asus ZenFone 5 (90)
o 41 General Mobile GM9 Pro (90)
o 42 Google Pixel (90)
o 43 HTC U11 (90)
o 44 Vivo X20 Plus (90)
o 45 Xiaomi Mi Note 3 (90)
o 46 Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge (89)
o 47 Apple iPhone 7 Plus (88)
o 48 Motorola One Zoom (87)
o 49 Samsung Galaxy A9 (86)
o 50 Crosscall Trekker-X4 (85)
o 51 LG G7 ThinQ (85)
o 52 Nokia 9 PureView (85)
o 53 Samsung Galaxy A50 (85)
o 54 Black Shark 2 (84)
o 55 LG V30 (82)
o 56 Motorola Moto Z2 Force (82)
o 57 Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge (82)
o 58 Motorola Moto G7 Plus (80)
o 59 Apple iPhone 6 (73)
o 60 Google Nexus 6P (73)
o 61 Meizu Pro 7 Plus (71)
o 62 Lava Z25 (70)
o 63 Samsung Galaxy S5 (70)
o 64 Motorola Moto G5S (69)
o 65 Apple iPhone 5s (68)
o 66 Nokia 8 (68)
o 67 Wiko View 3 Pro (67)
o 68 Fairphone 3 (66)
o 69 Samsung Galaxy J2 Pro (2018) (65)
o 70 Altice S61 (56)

[The Real Bev]

I found the GCam Moto G5+ apk here, but haven't installed it yet...

https://androidhost.org/get/AuTGyiJ

--
Cheers, Bev
"The federal government has taken too much tax money from the
people, too much authority from the states, and too much liberty
with the Constitution." -- Ronald Reagan

[Arlen Holder]

Here are the facts from today's DXOMark detailed camera QOR reviews:
<https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>

*TOP TEN*

o 01 Huawei Mate 30 Pro 5G (123)

o 02 Honor V30 Pro (122)
o 03 Huawei Mate 30 Pro (121)
o 04 Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro Premium Edition (121)
o 05 Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (117)
o 06 Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G (117)
o 07 Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ (117)
o 08 Huawei P30 Pro (116)
o 09 Oppo Reno 10x Zoom (116)
o 10 Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (116)

*ALL THE REST*
o 11 OnePlus 7 Pro (114)
o 12 Honor 20 Pro (113)
o 13 Samsung Galaxy S10+ (113)
o 14 Google Pixel 4 (112)
o 15 Huawei Mate 20 Pro (112)
o 16 Xiaomi Mi 9 (110)
o 17 Apple iPhone 11 (109)
o 18 Huawei P20 Pro (109)
o 19 Apple iPhone XS Max (106)
o 20 Asus ZenFone 6 (104)
o 21 HTC U12+ (103)
o 22 Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (103)
o 23 Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 (103)
o 24 Google Pixel 3 (102)
o 25 Xiaomi Redmi K20 Pro (102)
o 26 Apple iPhone XR (101)
o 27 Google Pixel 3a (101)
o 28 Samsung Galaxy S9+ (100)
o 29 Google Pixel 2 (99)
o 30 LG G8 ThinQ (99)
o 31 Xiaomi Mi 8 (99)
o 32 OnePlus 6T (98)
o 33 Apple iPhone X (97)
o 34 Huawei Mate 10 Pro (97)
o 35 Lenovo Z6 Pro (97)
o 36 LG V40 ThinQ (97)
o 37 OnePlus 6 (96)
o 38 Asus ROG Phone II (95)
o 39 Sony Xperia 5 (95)
o 40 Apple iPhone 8 Plus (94)
o 41 Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (94)
o 42 Sony Xperia 1 (94)
o 43 Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (91)
o 44 Asus ZenFone 5 (90)
o 45 General Mobile GM9 Pro (90)
o 46 Google Pixel (90)
o 47 HTC U11 (90)
o 48 Vivo X20 Plus (90)
o 49 Xiaomi Mi Note 3 (90)
o 50 Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge (89)
o 51 Apple iPhone 7 Plus (88)
o 52 Samsung Galaxy A9 (88)
o 53 Motorola One Zoom (87)
o 54 Vsmart Live (87)
o 55 Crosscall Trekker-X4 (86)
o 56 LG G7 ThinQ (85)
o 57 Nokia 7.2 (85)
o 58 Nokia 9 PureView (85)
o 59 Samsung Galaxy A50 (85)
o 60 Black Shark 2 (84)
o 61 LG V30 (84)
o 62 Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (84)
o 63 Motorola Moto Z2 Force (82)
o 64 Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge (82)
o 65 Motorola Moto G7 Plus (80)
o 66 Apple iPhone 6 (73)
o 67 Google Nexus 6P (73)
o 68 Meizu Pro 7 Plus (71)
o 69 Lava Z25 (70)
o 70 Samsung Galaxy S5 (70)
o 71 Motorola Moto G5S (69)
o 72 Apple iPhone 5s (68)
o 73 Nokia 8 (68)
o 74 Wiko View 3 Pro (67)
o 75 Fairphone 3 (66)
o 76 Samsung Galaxy J2 Pro (2018) (65)
o 77 Altice S61 (56)
--

[Arlen Holder]

Here are the DXOmark test summaries as of today.
o 1 Oppo Find X2 Pro [124]
o 2 Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro [124]
o 3 Huawei Mate 30 Pro 5G [123]
o 4 Honor V30 Pro [122]
o 5 Huawei Mate 30 Pro [121]
o 6 Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro Premium Edition [121]
o 7 Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max [117]
o 8 Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G [117]
o 9 Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ [117]
o 10 Huawei P30 Pro [116]

All the rest...
o 11 Oppo Reno 10x Zoom [116]
o 12 Samsung Galaxy S10 5G [116]
o 13 OnePlus 7 Pro [114]
o 14 OnePlus 7T Pro [114]
o 15 Honor 20 Pro [113]
o 16 Samsung Galaxy S10+ [113]
o 17 Google Pixel 4 [112]
o 18 Huawei Mate 20 Pro [112]
o 19 Huawei Mate 20 X [111]
o 20 Xiaomi Mi 9 [110]
o 21 Apple iPhone 11 [109]
o 22 Huawei P20 Pro [109]
o 23 Apple iPhone XS Max [106]
o 24 Asus ZenFone 6 [104]
o 25 HTC U12+ [103]
o 26 Samsung Galaxy Note 9 [103]
o 27 Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 [103]
o 28 Google Pixel 3 [102]
o 29 Xiaomi Redmi K20 Pro [102]
o 30 Apple iPhone XR [101]
o 31 Google Pixel 3a [101]
o 32 Samsung Galaxy S9+ [100]
o 33 Google Pixel 2 [99]
o 34 LG G8 ThinQ [99]
o 35 Xiaomi Mi 8 [99]
o 36 OnePlus 6T [98]
o 37 Apple iPhone X [97]
o 38 Lenovo Z6 Pro [97]
o 39 LG V40 ThinQ [97]
o 40 OnePlus 6 [96]
o 41 Asus ROG Phone II [95]
o 42 Sony Xperia 5 [95]
o 43 Apple iPhone 8 Plus [94]
o 44 Samsung Galaxy Note 8 [94]
o 45 Sony Xperia 1 [94]
o 46 Xiaomi Pocophone F1 [91]
o 47 Asus ZenFone 5 [90]
o 48 General Mobile GM9 Pro [90]
o 49 Google Pixel [90]
o 50 HTC U11 [90]
o 51 Vivo X20 Plus [90]
o 52 Xiaomi Mi Note 3 [90]
o 53 Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge [89]
o 54 Apple iPhone 7 Plus [88]
o 55 Samsung Galaxy A9 [88]
o 56 Motorola One Zoom [87]
o 57 Vsmart Live [87]
o 58 Crosscall Trekker-X4 [86]
o 59 LG G7 ThinQ [85]
o 60 Nokia 7.2 [85]
o 61 Nokia 9 PureView [85]
o 62 Samsung Galaxy A50 [85]
o 63 Black Shark 2 [84]
o 64 LG V30 [84]
o 65 Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro [84]
o 66 Motorola Moto Z2 Force [82]
o 67 Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge [82]
o 68 Motorola Moto G7 Plus [80]
o 69 Apple iPhone 6 [73]
o 70 Google Nexus 6P [73]
o 71 Meizu Pro 7 Plus [71]
o 72 Lava Z25 [70]
o 73 Samsung Galaxy S5 [70]
o 74 Motorola Moto G5S [69]
o 75 Apple iPhone 5s [68]
o 76 Nokia 8 [68]
o 77 Wiko View 3 Pro [67]
o 78 Fairphone 3 [66]
o 79 Samsung Galaxy J2 Pro (2018) [65]
o 80 Altice S61 [56]
--
I believe in facts instead of in whatever MARKETING wishes to feed us.

[Arlen Holder]

UPDATE for the permanent Usenet record...

Apple marketing specializes in selling a mere _illusion_ of functionality.

With respect to smartphone camera quality of results, the facts are thus:
o *7th place* Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
o *21st place* Apple iPhone 11
o *23rd place* Apple iPhone XS Max
o *30th place* Apple iPhone XR
o *37th place* Apple iPhone X
o *43rd place* Apple iPhone 8 Plus
o *54th place* Apple iPhone 7 Plus
o *69th place* Apple iPhone 6
o *75th place* Apple iPhone 5s
<https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>

Those are simply the facts, which most Apple owners can't/won't comprehend.
o Flagship camera comparison between the Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max vs. Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.photo.digital/_zi9q__n_BM>
--
Adults comprehend the difference between facts & mere MARKETING illusions.

[Arlen Holder]

UPDATE:

Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
<https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>

Individual detailed itemized reviews are, of course, also on the web site.

Top ten...
o Huawei P40 Pro (128)
o Honor 30 Pro+ (125)
o Oppo Find X2 Pro (124)
o Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (124)
o Huawei Mate 30 Pro 5G (123)
o Honor V30 Pro (122)
o Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (122)
o Huawei Mate 30 Pro (121)
o Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro Premium Edition (121)
o Samsung Galaxy S20+ (118)

All the rest...
o Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G (117)
o Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ (117)
o Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (117)
o Huawei P30 Pro (116)
o Oppo Reno 10x Zoom (116)
o Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (116)
o OnePlus 7 Pro (114)
o OnePlus 7T Pro (114)
o Honor 20 Pro (113)
o Samsung Galaxy S10+ (113)
o Google Pixel 4 (112)
o Huawei Mate 20 Pro (112)
o Huawei Mate 20 X (111)
o Xiaomi Mi 9 (110)
o Apple iPhone 11 (109)
o Huawei P20 Pro (109)
o Apple iPhone XS Max (106)
o Samsung Galaxy Z Flip (105)
o Asus ZenFone 6 (104)
o HTC U12+ (103)
o Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (103)
o Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 (103)
o Google Pixel 3 (102)
o Xiaomi Redmi K20 Pro (102)
o Apple iPhone XR (101)
o Google Pixel 3a (101)
o Samsung Galaxy S9+ (100)
o Google Pixel 2 (99)
o LG G8 ThinQ (99)
o Xiaomi Mi 8 (99)
o OnePlus 6T (98)
o Apple iPhone X (97)
o Lenovo Z6 Pro (97)
o LG V40 ThinQ (97)
o OnePlus 6 (96)
o Asus ROG Phone II (95)
o Realme X2 Pro (95)
o Sony Xperia 5 (95)
o Apple iPhone 8 Plus (94)
o Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (94)
o Sony Xperia 1 (94)
o Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (91)
o Asus ZenFone 5 (90)
o General Mobile GM9 Pro (90)
o Google Pixel (90)
o HTC U11 (90)
o Vivo X20 Plus (90)
o Xiaomi Mi Note 3 (90)
o Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge (89)
o Apple iPhone 7 Plus (88)
o Samsung Galaxy A9 (88)
o Motorola One Zoom (87)
o Vsmart Live (87)
o Crosscall Trekker-X4 (86)
o LG G7 ThinQ (85)
o Nokia 7.2 (85)
o Nokia 9 PureView (85)
o Samsung Galaxy A50 (85)
o Black Shark 2 (84)
o LG V30 (84)
o Samsung Galaxy A71 (84)
o Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (84)
o Motorola Moto Z2 Force (82)
o Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge (82)
o Motorola Moto G7 Plus (80)
o Apple iPhone 6 (73)
o Google Nexus 6P (73)
o Meizu Pro 7 Plus (71)
o Lava Z25 (70)
o Samsung Galaxy S5 (70)
o Motorola Moto G5S (69)
o Apple iPhone 5s (68)
o Nokia 8 (68)
o Wiko View 3 Pro (67)
o Fairphone 3 (66)
o Samsung Galaxy J2 Pro (2018) (65)
o Altice S61 (56)
--
MARKETING feeds you to believe test results aren't what they really are.

[Eric Stevens]

On Tue, 19 Nov 2019 08:54:20 -0800 (PST), Whisky-dave
<whisk...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, 19 November 2019 14:21:33 UTC, Arlen Holder wrote:
>
>
>>
>> If nospam feels there is valid evidence DXOmark is being paid...
>> o Name just one
>
>Who pays DXOmark to do it someone must get paid surely or does everyone work for nothing.
>How to they aqurie all these phones to test, are they given one to test and then return it or do they get to keep it.
>Do they just test a phone once or many times ?
>
>> It's what an adult would do.
>
>An adult would try to work out why someone would test dozens of phones every month or so without being paid.
>

The point is that nospam implies they are paid as a bribe.
He will not accept that it is a fee for service.

>
>> The child-like response nospam most often comes up with in response to
>> facts he hates is that he conjures up completely baseless utter
>> fabrications sans a shred of proof, which is nospam's specialty, just as
>> it's the specialty of the fifth-grade bullies I confront often at schools
>> that I substitute teach at.
>
>What do you do to confront bullies ?
>How do we know they are bullying you or anyone.
>
>
>
>> In fact, I've nicknamed a particularly pernicious fourth-grade bully
>> "nospam", simply because every time he's involved in an altercation, he
>> fabricates baseless accusations, just as nospam always does, where he has
>> no concept of the fact that nobody believes a word he says, since he can
>> never back up his fabricated claims, with even a _single_ fact.
>
>Well you could actually find out whether anyone gets paid for testing or prove that they are doing it for the love of it.
>Most peolpe get paid for doing jobs, the only things people don't normally get paid to do are called hobbies or is it slavery.
>
>
>

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[nospam]

In article <k5fmbflf4qv04mqs0...@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens

<eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:

> >> If nospam feels there is valid evidence DXOmark is being paid...
> >> o Name just one
> >
> >Who pays DXOmark to do it someone must get paid surely or does everyone work
> >for nothing.
> >How to they aqurie all these phones to test, are they given one to test and
> >then return it or do they get to keep it.
> >Do they just test a phone once or many times ?
> >
> >> It's what an adult would do.
> >
> >An adult would try to work out why someone would test dozens of phones every
> >month or so without being paid.
> >
> The point is that nospam implies they are paid as a bribe.
> He will not accept that it is a fee for service.

call it whatever you want, but the reality is that those who pay their
fees get higher ratings. it's as simple as that.

[geoff]

What if they all pay their fees ?

geoff

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-12 2:58 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> UPDATE:
>
> Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
> <https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>
>
> Individual detailed itemized reviews are, of course, also on the web site.

You should do an analysis of how much time passes between Apple
releasing a phone and DXOMark getting around to reviewing it versus how
long the lag is for other phones...

...and then learn to understand what that implies about rankings in fast
moving technology, Liar.

[Eric Stevens]

On Tue, 12 May 2020 22:04:48 -0700, Alan Baker
<notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote:

>On 2020-05-12 2:58 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
>> UPDATE:
>>
>> Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
>> <https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>
>>
>> Individual detailed itemized reviews are, of course, also on the web site.
>
>You should do an analysis of how much time passes between Apple
>releasing a phone and DXOMark getting around to reviewing it versus how
>long the lag is for other phones...
>
>...and then learn to understand what that implies about rankings in fast
>moving technology, Liar.

Change of subject, followed by an implied accusation lacking evidence
or explanation.

Has it occured to you that Apple might be slower than others to have
their phones tested?

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[nospam]

In article <otenbfla98tak7svh...@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens

<eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:

> >On 2020-05-12 2:58 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> >> Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
> >> <https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>
> >>
> >> Individual detailed itemized reviews are, of course, also on the web site.
> >
> >You should do an analysis of how much time passes between Apple
> >releasing a phone and DXOMark getting around to reviewing it versus how
> >long the lag is for other phones...
> >
> >...and then learn to understand what that implies about rankings in fast
> >moving technology, Liar.
>
> Change of subject, followed by an implied accusation lacking evidence
> or explanation.

false.

> Has it occured to you that Apple might be slower than others to have
> their phones tested?

has it occurred to you that dxomark, not apple, chooses which phones to
test and when, and since apple doesn't pay them anything, they aren't
at the top of the list?

[nospam]

In article <KemdnZH_Vtkl-CbD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >>>
> >> The point is that nospam implies they are paid as a bribe.
> >> He will not accept that it is a fee for service.
> >
> > call it whatever you want, but the reality is that those who pay their
> > fees get higher ratings. it's as simple as that.
> >
>
> What if they all pay their fees ?

they don't all pay their fees.

reputable companies don't play that game, and few people give a shit
about dxomark since it's well known in the industry that they're a paid
service.

[sms]

On 11/19/2019 5:27 AM, Chris Green wrote:

> What manufacturers' smartphones are included in the tests?

Seems like most of the mid to high-end phones from all manufacturers.
These are extensive tests and take a while to complete once a new model
comes out. I don't see results for the new iPhone SE yet, and it'll be
interesting to see how good that single 12Mp sensor is compared to other
phones in that price range.

If there are different models with the same camera system from the same
manufacturer, with the same CPU, they often won't test all the models.
I.e. the Samsung S10 and S10e have the same primary and ultra-wide
sensors, while the S10 adds a telephoto lens with another sensor.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-13 2:21 a.m., Eric Stevens wrote:
> On Tue, 12 May 2020 22:04:48 -0700, Alan Baker
> <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote:
>
>> On 2020-05-12 2:58 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
>>> UPDATE:
>>>
>>> Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
>>> <https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>
>>>
>>> Individual detailed itemized reviews are, of course, also on the web site.
>>
>> You should do an analysis of how much time passes between Apple
>> releasing a phone and DXOMark getting around to reviewing it versus how
>> long the lag is for other phones...
>>
>> ...and then learn to understand what that implies about rankings in fast
>> moving technology, Liar.
>
> Change of subject, followed by an implied accusation lacking evidence
> or explanation.
>
> Has it occured to you that Apple might be slower than others to have
> their phones tested?

1. It wasn't a change of subject. It was an attempt to explain the why
behind the subject.

2. It is irrelevant who is responsible for the delay in evaluating the
EFFECT of the delay.

Technology moves quickly and the one-upsmanship in phone cameras is an
area where things are moving very quickly indeed.

So if there is a delay in testing a phone, it is only to be expected
that it will then have had other phones where there was less of a delay
outperform it in this arena.

[Eric Stevens]

On Wed, 13 May 2020 16:55:09 -0700, Alan Baker

Aah! Now we get to your point.

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[Arlen Holder]

On Sun, 17 Mar 2019 16:59:56 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder wrote:

Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
<https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>

Top dozen smartphone camera quality of results in independent tests:
o Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra 130
o Huawei P40 Pro 128
o Honor 30 Pro+ 125
o Oppo Find X2 Pro 124
o Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro 124
o Huawei Mate 30 Pro 5G 123
o Honor V30 Pro 122
o Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 122
o Huawei Mate 30 Pro 121
o Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro Premium Edition 121
o Xiaomi Redmi K30 Pro Zoom Edition 120
o OnePlus 8 Pro 119

All the rest:
o Samsung Galaxy S20+ 118
o Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max 117
o Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G 117
o Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 117
o Huawei P30 Pro 116
o Oppo Reno 10x Zoom 116
o Samsung Galaxy S10 5G 116
o OnePlus 7 Pro 114
o OnePlus 7T Pro 114
o Honor 20 Pro 113
o Motorola Edge+ 113
o Samsung Galaxy S10+ 113
o Google Pixel 4 112
o Huawei Mate 20 Pro 112
o Huawei Mate 20 X 111
o Xiaomi Mi 9 110
o Apple iPhone 11 109
o Huawei P20 Pro 109
o Apple iPhone XS Max 106
o Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 105
o Asus ZenFone 6 104
o HTC U12+ 103
o Samsung Galaxy Note 9 103
o Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 103
o Google Pixel 3 102
o Xiaomi Redmi K20 Pro 102
o Apple iPhone SE (2020) 101
o Apple iPhone XR 101
o Google Pixel 3a 101
o LG V60 ThinQ 5G 100
o Samsung Galaxy S9+ 100
o Google Pixel 2 99
o LG G8 ThinQ 99
o Xiaomi Mi 8 99
o OnePlus 6T 98
o Apple iPhone X 97
o Lenovo Z6 Pro 97
o LG V40 ThinQ 97
o OnePlus 6 96
o Asus ROG Phone 2 95
o Realme X2 Pro 95
o Sony Xperia 5 95
o Apple iPhone 8 Plus 94
o Samsung Galaxy Note 8 94
o Sony Xperia 1 94
o Xiaomi Pocophone F1 91
o Asus ZenFone 5 90
o General Mobile GM9 Pro 90
o Google Pixel 90
o HTC U11 90
o Vivo X20 Plus 90
o Xiaomi Mi Note 3 90
o Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge 89
o Apple iPhone 7 Plus 88
o Samsung Galaxy A9 88
o Motorola One Zoom 87
o Vsmart Live 87
o Crosscall Trekker-X4 86
o LG G7 ThinQ 85
o Nokia 7.2 85
o Nokia 9 PureView 85
o Samsung Galaxy A50 85
o Black Shark 2 84
o LG V30 84
o Samsung Galaxy A71 84
o Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro 84
o Motorola Moto Z2 Force 82
o Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge 82
o Motorola Moto G7 Plus 80
o Crosscall Core-X4 79
o Apple iPhone 6 73
o Google Nexus 6P 73
o Meizu Pro 7 Plus 71
o Lava Z25 70
o Samsung Galaxy S5 70
o Motorola Moto G5S 69
o Apple iPhone 5s 68
o Nokia 8 68
o Wiko View 3 Pro 67
o Fairphone 3 66
o Samsung Galaxy J2 Pro (2018) 65
o Altice S61 56
--
Bringing facts & logic to this newsgroup via consistent reliable cites.

[Arlen Holder]

Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
<https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews/>

Top fifteen smartphone camera quality of results in independent tests:
o 1. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra 130
o 2. Huawei P40 Pro 128
o 3. Vivo X50 Pro+ 127
o 4. Honor 30 Pro+ 125
o 5. Oppo Find X2 Pro 124
o 6. Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro 124
o 7. Huawei Mate 30 Pro 5G 123
o 8. Honor V30 Pro 122
o 9. Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 122
o 10. Huawei Mate 30 Pro 121
o 11. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G 121
o 12. Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro Premium Edition 121
o 13. Xiaomi Redmi K30 Pro Zoom Edition 120
o 14. OnePlus 8 Pro 119
o 15. Samsung Galaxy S20+ 118

All the rest:

o Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G 117
o Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 117
o Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max 117

o Oppo Reno 10x Zoom 116
o Samsung Galaxy S10 5G 116
o Huawei P30 Pro 116

o OnePlus 7T Pro 114
o OnePlus 7 Pro 114

o Motorola Edge+ 113

o Honor 20 Pro 113

o Samsung Galaxy S10+ 113

o Huawei Mate 20 Pro 112
o Google Pixel 4 112
o Huawei Mate 20 X 111
o Xiaomi Mi 9 110
o Apple iPhone 11 109
o Huawei P20 Pro 109
o Apple iPhone XS Max 106
o Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 105
o Asus ZenFone 6 104

o Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 103
o Samsung Galaxy Note 9 103

o HTC U12+ 103

Those who believe only in MARKETING always end up paying more for less.

[Whisky-dave]

Yes only mugs are fooled by such things.

DxO Labs, the company which runs the DxOMark testing suite, is primarily a consultancy company. In other words, the company charges fees to advise camera hardware companies on how to improve their photography products. This is based on its own analysis and expertise in the camera industry.

No review site is guaranteed to be free from bias, but DxO’s business revolves around attracting big companies to it to make use of its expertise, which adds a lot of baggage to their reviews. Ranking test results in a way that encourages consumers to buy certain phones over others complicates everything.

Those who pay to work closely with DxOMark will likely score more highly in the company’s tests, which is then quoted by many other review sites. There’s pressure on smartphone OEMs to pay for DxO’s services simply for the press recognition.


And Trump is an expert on the coronavirus and he says there;'s nothing to be scared of, so it must be true ;-)

[Arlen Holder]

Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:

<https://www.dxomark.com/rankings/>

Top score of smartphone camera quality of results in independent tests:
o Huawei Mate 40 Pro 136
o Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra 133
o Huawei P40 Pro 132
o Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro 128
o Vivo X50 Pro+ 127*
o Oppo Find X2 Pro 126
o Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G 126
o Honor 30 Pro+ 125*
o Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max 124
o Huawei Mate 30 Pro 5G 123*
o Honor V30 Pro 122*
o Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G 121*
o Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro Premium Edition 121*
o Huawei Mate 30 Pro 121*
o Xiaomi Redmi K30 Pro Zoom Edition 120*
o OnePlus 8 Pro 119*
o Samsung Galaxy S20+ 118*
o Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 117*
o Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G 116
o Oppo Reno 10x Zoom 116*

All the rest:
o Samsung Galaxy S10 5G 116*
o Huawei P30 Pro 116*
o Asus ZenFone 7 Pro 115*
o OnePlus 7T Pro 114*
o OnePlus 7 Pro 114*
o Google Pixel 4 113
o Motorola Edge+ 113*
o Honor 20 Pro 113*
o Samsung Galaxy S10+ 113*
o Huawei P40 112
o Huawei Mate 20 Pro 112*
o Huawei Mate 20 X 111*
o Xiaomi Mi 9 110*
o Apple iPhone 11 109*
o Huawei P20 Pro 109*
o Apple iPhone XS Max 106*
o Oppo Find X2 Neo 105
o Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 105*
o Asus ZenFone 6 104*
o Xiaomi Mi MIX 3 103*
o Samsung Galaxy Note 9 103*
o HTC U12+ 103*
o Xiaomi Redmi K20 Pro 102*
o Google Pixel 3 102*
o Apple iPhone SE (2020) 101*
o Google Pixel 3a 101*
o Apple iPhone XR 101*
o LG V60 ThinQ 5G 100*
o Samsung Galaxy S9+ 100*
o LG G8 ThinQ 99*
o Xiaomi Mi 8 99*
o Google Pixel 2 99*
o OnePlus 6T 98*
o Lenovo Z6 Pro 97*
o LG V40 ThinQ 97*
o Apple iPhone X 97*
o OnePlus 6 96*
o Realme X2 Pro 95*
o Sony Xperia 5 95*
o Asus ROG Phone 2 95*
o Samsung Galaxy Note 8 94*
o Apple iPhone 8 Plus 94*
o Xiaomi Pocophone F1 91*
o General Mobile GM9 Pro 90*
o Asus ZenFone 5 90*
o Vivo X20 Plus 90*
o Xiaomi Mi Note 3 90*
o HTC U11 90*
o Google Pixel 90*
o Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge 89*
o Samsung Galaxy A9 88*
o Apple iPhone 7 Plus 88*
o Sony Xperia 1 87
o Vsmart Live 87*
o Motorola One Zoom 87*
o Crosscall Trekker-X4 86*
o Nokia 7.2 85*
o Nokia 9 PureView 85*
o LG G7 ThinQ 85*
o Samsung Galaxy A71 84*
o Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro 84*
o Black Shark 2 84*
o LG V30 84*
o Motorola Moto Z2 Force 82*
o Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge 82*
o Motorola Moto G7 Plus 80*
o Crosscall Core-X4 79*
o Samsung Galaxy A50 76
o Apple iPhone 6 73*
o Google Nexus 6P 73*
o Meizu Pro 7 Plus 71*
o Lava Z25 70*
o Samsung Galaxy S5 70*
o Motorola Moto G5S 69*
o Nokia 8 68*
o Apple iPhone 5s 68*
o Wiko View 3 Pro 67*
o Fairphone 3 66*
o Samsung Galaxy J2 Pro (2018) 65*
o Altice S61 56*
--
Independent tests prove that MARKETING is complete & utter bullshit.

[Chris Green]

Arlen Holder <arlen_...@newmachines.com> wrote:
> Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:

I'm rather more interested in how my mobile phone works as a phone, I
have a separate, much better than any mobile, camera for taking
pictures (and it fits in my pocket).

--
Chris Green
·

[sms]

I have a friend who's a professional photographer.

While he's moved 100% from Nikon to Fuji, for the best mirror-less
digital camera quality, he's really into the iPhone's "computational
photography."

None of the main-line SLR or mirrorless manufacturers have embraced
computational photography to the extent that Apple, Samsung, and some
Chinese smartphone makers have.

Fuji began adding computational photography it to the X-Pro 3
<https://photorumors.com/2019/10/21/report-fujifilm-is-the-first-camera-company-to-add-computational-photography-to-a-professional-camera-x-pro3>
, and the X-Pro 4, which should be announced any day now, should have
improved computational photography. But they are way behind Apple,
Samsung, and Huawei, Nikon and Canon are way behind Fuji.

It's become really tough for professional photographers lately, with so
many people carrying around a high-quality camera that makes it hard to
make mistakes.

[The Real Bev]

Actually, my Pixel2 phone (which I use as a camera LOTS more than as a
phone) is better than my Canon A720IS and is lighter and smaller. I
miss a genuine viewfinder and optical zoom and settings that are ALL
instantly visible all the time, but convenience matters a lot.

--
Cheers, Bev
"I don't need instructions, I have a hammer."
-- T.W. Wier

[Chris Green]

The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/26/2020 08:30 AM, Chris Green wrote:
> > Arlen Holder <arlen_...@newmachines.com> wrote:
> >> Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
> >
> > I'm rather more interested in how my mobile phone works as a phone, I
> > have a separate, much better than any mobile, camera for taking
> > pictures (and it fits in my pocket).
>
> Actually, my Pixel2 phone (which I use as a camera LOTS more than as a
> phone) is better than my Canon A720IS and is lighter and smaller. I
> miss a genuine viewfinder and optical zoom and settings that are ALL
> instantly visible all the time, but convenience matters a lot.
>

Yes, you specify the two things my little Panasonic digital camera has
that no phone camera has. ... and it's around the same size and
weight as many phones.

--
Chris Green
·

[Chris Green]

sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 10/26/2020 8:30 AM, Chris Green wrote:
> > Arlen Holder <arlen_...@newmachines.com> wrote:
> >> Here is the DXOMark overall camera output QOR summary as of this week:
> >
> > I'm rather more interested in how my mobile phone works as a phone, I
> > have a separate, much better than any mobile, camera for taking
> > pictures (and it fits in my pocket).
>
> I have a friend who's a professional photographer.
>
> While he's moved 100% from Nikon to Fuji, for the best mirror-less
> digital camera quality, he's really into the iPhone's "computational
> photography."
>
> None of the main-line SLR or mirrorless manufacturers have embraced
> computational photography to the extent that Apple, Samsung, and some
> Chinese smartphone makers have.
>

Not pocketable, try again! :-)

One very simple thing makes my pocketable digital camera stand out
from any current phone camera - a 30:1 zoom that will give you a full
definition picture throughout its range.

...oh, and a viewfinder that works when taking photographs in bright
sunlight.

--
Chris Green
·