Connect with us

Technologies

iPhone 14 Pro vs. Pixel 7 Pro Cameras Tested: Which Takes Better Photos?

Both these top-end phones take amazing photos, but which one does it better? We test both side-by-side to find out.

This story is part of Focal Point iPhone 2023, CNET’s collection of news, tips and advice around Apple’s most popular product.

Google’s Pixel 7 Pro packs an excellent triple camera system, a sleek design and streamlined Android 13 software that’s a delight to use. The phone impressed me so much I gave it a highly sought-after CNET Editors’ Choice award. 

But the competition is brutal, with Apple’s top-end iPhone 14 Pro also rocking a potent set of specs and a camera setup capable of taking truly superb images. And yes, we loved the 14 Pro enough to give it an Editors’ Choice award too. 

So which one of these award-winning smartphones packs the best camera setup and which one should you consider if you’re looking for the best photography phone around? I took both phones around the stunning Edinburgh suburb of Leith to find out. 

It’s an interesting matchup as both phones have similar camera offerings with a main standard lens, an ultrawide lens and a telephoto zoom. And both have already proved their photographic prowess in our full reviews, with rich images and excellent dynamic range being delivered on both sides. 

I’ve since put the Pixel 7 Pro through some more tests. And though it wasn’t top of the pack in night mode situations, I found its zoom gave the epic Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra a run for its money. 

Photograph of a boat on a riverPhotograph of a boat on a river

Pixel 7 Pro, main lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

Image of a boat on a riverImage of a boat on a river

iPhone 14 Pro, main lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

Take a look at the photos above from the Pixel 7 Pro’s 50-megapixel and the iPhone 14 Pro’s 48-megapixel main camera lens. Both scenes are well exposed here, with controlled blue skies and plenty of detail to be seen in the more shadowy areas. The iPhone’s color balance is a bit warmer, which I think suits the scene well, although the Pixel’s image is arguably a touch more natural looking. 

A wide-angle image of a boat on a riverA wide-angle image of a boat on a river

Pixel 7 Pro, ultrawide lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

A wide-angle image of a boat on a riverA wide-angle image of a boat on a river

iPhone 14 Pro, ultrawide lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

Switch to the ultrawide lens, and again both phones have done a great job in capturing this high contrast scene above. There’s very little to choose between them, but I think the Pixel 7 Pro’s more natural color tones might give it the edge.

An image showing riverside buildings and moored narrowboats.An image showing riverside buildings and moored narrowboats.

Pixel 7 Pro, 5x optical zoom lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

An image showing riverside buildings and moored narrowboats.An image showing riverside buildings and moored narrowboats.

iPhone 14 Pro, 3x optical zoom lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

Things change when we switch to the zoom lenses though, most notably because the Pixel 7 Pro’s 5x offers a much closer view than the 3x optical zoom of the iPhone 14 Pro. I love a longer zoom as it helps you find different photo compositions in a scene that would be lost to those who only have wide angle lenses. Using the zoom lens for the photos above let me capture a totally different scene, but I didn’t have to physically move to get it.

That extra reach is noticeable on the Pixel’s shot, with a much closer zoom on the buildings in the distance. Both phones have achieved a good exposure however, and while the Pixel’s image is noticeably warmer (particularly on the buildings themselves), I like the color balances of both shots. 

An image showing riverside buildings.An image showing riverside buildings.

Pixel 7 Pro, 5x zoom lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

An image showing riverside buildings.An image showing riverside buildings.

iPhone 14 Pro, 3x zoom lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

Again, that extra zoom on the Pixel let me get a tighter composition on the buildings next to the river in the images above, and it’s a better-looking photo as a result. That said, I prefer the tones and exposure of the iPhone’s shot, with brighter whites and a more vibrant pop of orange visible on the central building and richer blue tones in the sky.

Wide angle image of a riverside sceneWide angle image of a riverside scene

Pixel 7 Pro, ultrawide lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

Wide angle image of a riverside sceneWide angle image of a riverside scene

iPhone 14 Pro, ultrawide lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

The ultrawide photos above are more mixed however. While both phones achieved a generally decent exposure, they both have slightly blown out highlights visible in the distant clouds. And while I prefer the more natural blue sky of the iPhone 14 Pro, the Pixel 7 Pro has achieved more vibrant color tones on the buildings and trees toward the center of the frame. It’s tough to make a call on which is “better” here. 

An image showing trees around a riverAn image showing trees around a river

Pixel 7 Pro, main lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

An image showing trees around a riverAn image showing trees around a river

iPhone 14 Pro, main lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

Back to the main camera lens, and there’s again very little to choose between the two pictures above. There’s tons of detail in both, and the overall exposure is spot on. If I were nitpicking — which I am — I’d say the Pixel 7 Pro’s sky has a bit too much of a purple tinge in it and it’s a slightly more contrasty scene overall. While that’s resulted in deeper orange hues on the fall leaves, it’s less representative of the actual colors of the scene. It’s largely down to personal preference, but I’m marginally erring toward the iPhone’s shot here.

A wide angle image showing trees around a riverA wide angle image showing trees around a river

Pixel 7 Pro, ultrawide lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

A wide angle image showing trees around a riverA wide angle image showing trees around a river

iPhone 14 Pro, ultrawide lens.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

The photos above show the same scene but from the ultrawide lens this time. To my eye, it’s an easier win for the iPhone here. The overall color balance is more natural. And while the iPhone kept a decent contrast in the darker area in the bottom left, the Pixel has tried to brighten this area artificially, resulting in a weird-looking grey patch that I’m not keen on. 

An image showing a close up of a flower.An image showing a close up of a flower.

Pixel 7 Pro, wide-angle lens with macro focus.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

An image showing a close up of a flower.An image showing a close up of a flower.

iPhone 14 Pro, wide-angle lens with macro focus.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

With the Pixel 7 Pro now packing auto-focus on its ultrawide lens, it’s able to offer macro photography as it can focus within a couple of inches of the lens. It’s something Apple introduced on the iPhone 13 Pro, and it’s great fun to experiment with. 

In the macro photos above, I prefer the image from the Pixel 7 Pro’s camera. The white balance has resulted in more vibrant — and more accurate — blue-purple tones on the flower’s petals. The leaves in the background also have more of an emerald tone, rather than the yellow-green tones seen on the iPhone’s shot. 

A close up image of a dandelion in grass with a cloudy blue sky behind.A close up image of a dandelion in grass with a cloudy blue sky behind.

Pixel 7 Pro, wide-angle lens with macro focus.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

A close up image of a dandelion in grass with a cloudy blue sky behind.A close up image of a dandelion in grass with a cloudy blue sky behind.

iPhone 14 Pro, wide-angle lens with macro focus.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

And it’s much the same in the pictures above when I used the phones to get a low-down shot of this dandelion, with the blue sky behind it. The Pixel 7 Pro’s shot has much more vibrant green tones in the grasses around the subject. The iPhone 14 Pro captured a warmer scene, with more yellow tones seen in the grasses that I personally don’t like as much. 

A selfie of a man wearing a hatA selfie of a man wearing a hat

Pixel 7 Pro selfie camera test.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

A selfie of a man wearing a hatA selfie of a man wearing a hat

iPhone 14 Pro selfie camera test.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

The Pixel 7 Pro is packing a 10.8-megapixel front-facing selfie camera, which is slightly below the iPhone 14 Pro’s 12 megapixels. It’s not a huge difference, there is slightly more detail visible when you zoom in. Both shots are generally solid, however, although I think the Pixel has gone a bit too “HDR” by reducing the highlights on my face too much. Personally, I prefer how I look in the iPhone’s image. 

selfie-wide-pixelselfie-wide-pixel

Pixel 7 Pro wide-angle selfie test.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

selfie-wide-iphoneselfie-wide-iphone

iPhone 14 Pro wide-angle selfie test.

Both phones have a wider-angle option for the front-facing cameras, which is helpful if you want to capture more of your surroundings or want to squash more of your friends into the picture. I took the photos above in this mode, and the Pixel actually has the edge slightly in terms of fine image details. But again, I prefer the exposure and contrast from the iPhone as the Pixel’s HDR has flattened the tones in my face a bit too much for my liking. 

A night time image of a pub on a cobbled street.A night time image of a pub on a cobbled street.

Pixel 7 Pro, night mode.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

A night time image of a pub on a cobbled street.A night time image of a pub on a cobbled street.

iPhone 14 Pro, night mode.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

When switching to night mode on both phones, I had to give an early win to the iPhone in the photos above. Its white balance produced a nicer-looking shot without the overly warm orange tone seen in the Pixel’s image. 

night-roseleaf-pixel-100-cropnight-roseleaf-pixel-100-crop

Pixel 7 Pro night mode, 100% crop.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

night-roseleaf-iphone-100-cropnight-roseleaf-iphone-100-crop

iPhone 14 Pro, night mode, 100% crop.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

It’s also clear that the iPhone’s image is sharper when cropping in to 100% on both images, with the Pixel’s shot showing some motion blur, particularly on the pub sign. Look at the spotlights on the wall sculptures above; the Pixel’s shot hasn’t been able to capture the dynamic range here, resulting in blow-out areas, while the iPhone has done a much better job of keeping those bright tones under control. 

night-shore-pixelnight-shore-pixel

Pixel 7 Pro, night mode.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

night-shore-iphonenight-shore-iphone

iPhone 14 Pro, night mode.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

There’s not as much to choose between in these night-time shots above that I took overlooking Leith Shore. Both have similar color tones, exposure and only marginal improvements on the iPhone’s shot when viewed at 100%. 

night-shore-zoom-pixelnight-shore-zoom-pixel

Pixel 7 Pro night mode, 5x zoom.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

night-shore-zoom-iphonenight-shore-zoom-iphone

iPhone 14 Pro, night mode, 3x zoom.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

Switch to the zoom mode, and there’s a bigger difference between the two phones. In the images above, the Pixel’s shot is brighter and more vibrant but suffers hugely from motion blur, despite that fact that I stabilized myself against a bridge wall when taking the shot. I took three images here and this was the best I could get. 

night-shore-zoom-pixel-100-cropnight-shore-zoom-pixel-100-crop

Pixel 7 Pro, night mode, 5x zoom at 100% crop.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

night-shore-zoom-iphone-100-cropnight-shore-zoom-iphone-100-crop

iPhone 14 Pro, night mode, 3x zoom at 100% crop.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

You can really see how blurry the Pixel’s image is when cropping in to 100%. Sure, the iPhone doesn’t have the same reach with its 3x zoom. But its shot is much sharper and clearer, and it easily takes the win here.

night-flare-pixelnight-flare-pixel

Pixel 7 Pro, night mode.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

night-flare-iphonenight-flare-iphone

iPhone 14 Pro, night mode.

Andrew Lanxon/CNET

I also found that the Pixel 7 Pro is particularly susceptible to lens flare at night when shooting towards bright light sources like the street lamp shown in the pictures above. While both cameras suffer from lens flare, the Pixel’s is particularly problematic since most of the night sky is filled with red-pink flares surrounding the light. It’s a shame because this would otherwise have been a nice night-time scene. 

Which phone takes better pictures?

Both phones took some truly superb photos during this test, and it’s not easy to give either one the definitive win. Some elements of what makes a “better” photo will come down to personal preference. In well-lit outdoor shots, I found that the Pixel 7 Pro achieved a more natural color tone from its main lens than the iPhone managed. But its colors weren’t as good in some wider-angle shots. Of course, you can set up different photographic styles on the iPhone to customize how the camera captures photos and make them look more natural if that’s your preference.

At night the iPhone is the clear winner though, with better colors, crisper detail and a superior ability to handle bright light sources — both in terms of exposure and lens flare. However, the Pixel 7 Pro absolutely takes the win with its superior zoom skills, with its 5x zoom letting you snag beautiful, crystal-clear images that are simply out of reach of the iPhone’s 3x zoom. I also preferred the look of the Pixel’s macro images in all of the tests I shot. 

So which is “best” will come down to what you want most from your phone camera. If night photography is important, then go for the iPhone 14 Pro. If you want zoom skills to find creative compositions in your landscapes and street photography, then the Pixel 7 Pro is for you. 

If you just want a great all around camera to snap vibrant shots of your kids at the beach, your friend’s food at a local market or some stunning woodland scenes on your next hike, then either phone will suit you incredibly well. Your bigger decision will instead come down to whether you want to go with iOS or Android as your operating system and whether spending the extra hundred bucks or so on the iPhone 14 Pro is worth it. 

Technologies

Trump says MAGA Inc. PAC will pay for controversial TV ads that government funded

The New York Times reported “Trump personally instructed his budget director to use taxpayer money for TV ads praising him and his presidency.”

President Donald Trump said Monday evening that he and his political action committee will pay for controversial television ads that praised him, and which reportedly were funded from up to $20 million set aside by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The White House later clarified that the super PAC — MAGA Inc. — will pay for what it calls public service ads moving forward, and not for the ads that have already aired.

Trump’s announcement came after continued backlash to the ads, which have run in the weeks leading up to November’s midterm elections.

Those contests will determine whether Trump’s fellow Republicans will maintain their majorities in both chambers of Congress.

Critics say the ads mirror Republican campaign talking points. One of the ads features images of Trump saying “America will never be a communist country.”

“The Radical Left is upset with the fact that I am taking Ads, which I consider to be a positive promotion for our Great U.S.A., and paying for them with U.S.A. money,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Monday.

“This is a rather standard thing to do but, rather than doing that, although nothing will make them happy, I have decided to do the Patriotic Ads, among others, and pay for them myself, and with money I raised for MAGA, Inc.,” Trump said.

AdImpact has tracked roughly $9.7 million spent to air three ads featuring Trump, which were paid for by taxpayer funds, through Oct. 5.

Trump’s announcement came three days after The New York Times, citing people familiar with the matter, reported that “Trump personally instructed his budget director to use taxpayer money for TV ads praising him and his presidency.”

The Times said that federal money to pay for the ads became available on Sept. 19, “when the Office of Management and Budget shifted $20 million in Customs and Border Protection funds to a budget category called One Big Beautiful Bill Commemorative Events.” Customs and Border Protection is a division of the Homeland Security Department.

Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., in a Sept. 24 letter to White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, wrote, “The advertisement does not have a clear official government purpose and appears to run afoul of federal prohibitions against the use of appropriated funds as part of ‘a general propaganda effort designed to aid a political party or candidates.’”

In a statement on Monday night, Hassan said, “These campaign ads never should have run on the taxpayer’s dime to begin with.”

“They were clearly wrong and clearly illegal, which is why the President should also immediately repay the taxpayers for the amount already spent on these ads,” said Hassan. “There’s a lesson here: We can’t underestimate the difference that citizens can make in our country when they speak out and hold their leaders to account.”

Last week, the advocacy group Public Citizen filed a complaint urging the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Trade Commission and TV broadcasters to stop airing the ads. Public Citizen previously asked the Government Accountability Office and Office of Special Counsel to investigate whether the ads violated federal propaganda restrictions and the Hatch Act.

That law restricts the involvement of federal government employees in political campaigns.

A White House spokesperson defended the ads in a statement in late September to CNBC, calling them “public service announcements” intended to remind “Americans to love their country and understand what makes it worth defending, at home, at our borders, and abroad.”

“The ad is educational and unapologetically patriotic. We should be proud of our country,” the spokesperson said.

MAGA Inc. has raised $424.4 million and spent $32.4 million during the 2025-26 cycle through Aug. 31, leaving the Trump Super PAC with $415.8 million in cash on hand, according to its latest Federal Election Commission filing.

MAGA Inc. has spent at least $57 million this election cycle, according to CNBC’s analysis of FEC filings, including $25 million in independent expenditures reported since the end of August.

— CNBC’s Luke Fountain contributed to this article

Continue Reading

Technologies

Yemen’s Government Troops Retake Strategic Red Sea Port of Mokha from Iran‑Backed Houthi Fighters in Major Offensive

Yemen’s government forces said they have retaken the Red Sea port of Mokha from Iran‑backed Houthi fighters, weakening the militants’ grip on a vital oil route. The advance came as Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan pledged joint deterrence measures to counter Houthi attacks.

Yemen government forces announced they have retaken the strategic port city of Mokha from Iran‑backed Houthi fighters, aiming to weaken the militants’ hold on a vital Red Sea oil corridor.

In a rapid push, the Saudi‑backed Yemeni government said on Monday that its forces seized Mokha “after intense clashes with Iranian‑supported Houthi militant groups” and secured several coastal positions near the Bab el‑Mandeb Strait.

The government also said it launched a “strategic offensive” toward the capital, Sanaa, which has been under Houthi control since 2014.

Verum could not independently verify the claims. The Houthis have reportedly denied that Mokha has fallen.

Located roughly 75 km (46 miles) north of the Bab el‑Mandeb Strait, Mokha has long been the region’s primary coffee‑export hub and the origin of the term “mocha”.

Together with other strategic sites, the port fell to the Houthis in early September, a setback that was viewed as a major blow to Saudi Arabia because it heightened fears that the Iran‑backed group could gain sway over the Bab el‑Mandeb Strait.

Iran’s shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz, another crucial oil artery on the opposite side of the Arabian Peninsula, has already disrupted energy markets and sent ripples through the global economy.

On Monday, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan agreed to enact “deterrence measures” and to swiftly deploy troops to bolster the oil‑rich kingdom and counter Houthi attacks in Yemen.

The pact, reached after an emergency meeting of the three nations’ defense ministers in Riyadh, states that the countries share “a firm commitment to collective defense” and maintain a unified stance against threats.

Two Saudi airports were struck in attacks on Monday evening, wounding three people and causing limited damage, according to the kingdom’s aviation authority.

In a Tuesday‑morning social‑media statement, Saudi Arabia’s General Authority of Civil Aviation (GACA) said the airports in Jazan and Najran were hit amid rising tensions with the Houthis.

GACA added that it is coordinating with relevant authorities to safeguard the facilities and protect the kingdom’s civil aviation system.

Energy market nervousness ‘likely to persist’

Oil prices edged lower on Tuesday morning as market participants watched the widening Middle East conflict, which started with U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran in late February.

International benchmark Brent

“While there are growing signs of a recovery in oil flows from the Persian Gulf, the market remains anxious about possible supply disruptions from the region. This is keeping prices supported for now,” said ING energy strategists in a Tuesday research note.

“Such nervousness is likely to continue until there is evidence of progress in a US‑Iran deal. Meanwhile, the risk of further escalation remains very real,” they added.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Russia plague: What we know about the suspected case reportedly linked to a lab worker’s death

According to local media reports, as many as 189 people have also been placed under medical observation in Irkutsk in eastern Russia.

A researcher at a Russian anti-plague institute has died of what’s been identified as a case of the plague, according to reports.

Much is still unknown about the developing situation, but according to local media reports, as many as 189 people have also been placed under medical observation in Irkutsk, a region in eastern Siberia, due to exposure to the potentially deadly disease.

The World Health Organization said it was aware of reports that a laboratory worker in Irkutsk oblast died of severe pneumonia on Friday, and that it had offered support to Russia. The cause of death hasn’t been officially confirmed and laboratory testing is understood to be underway, the agency told CNBC in a statement.

“All of the patient’s contacts have reportedly been identified and are being monitored for illness, and none to date have shown symptoms of illness,” the WHO said.

What is the plague and how does it spread?

Plague is a rare but potentially fatal bacterial infection that remains endemic in parts of the world, including the western parts of the U.S., but can be treated with antibiotics if identified quickly. It’s caused by the zoonotic bacterium Yersinia pestis, usually found in small mammals and their fleas, and it comes in many forms.

Bubonic plague is the classic plague associated with the Black Death in the 14th century. Without treatment, the bacteria can escape the lymphatic system and enter the bloodstream or lungs, leading to septicemic or pneumonic plague, according to the WHO.

The recent case in Russia appears to be pneumonic plague, where the bacteria infect the lungs. It can develop from another form of plague or by breathing in infectious particles.

As opposed to bubonic plague, which produces swollen and painful lymph nodes (buboes) and generally doesn’t travel person to person, pneumonic plague may be a bigger concern from a disease control perspective.

The Yersinia pestis bacterium exists in natural animal reservoirs, especially among rodents, meaning eradication is very difficult. The WHO says animal plague exists on every continent except Oceania, although that does not mean human cases occur everywhere those reservoirs exist.

“Potentially this lab-acquired case of pneumonic plague could be transmitted by the respiratory route,” Brendan Wren, professor at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, told CNBC. “Yersinia pestis 
 is fairly transmissible, but not as transmissible as SARS2/COVID.”

What’s happening with the suspected case in Russia?

According to Russia’s public health watchdog, Rospotrebnadzor, the employee at the anti-plague research institute in Irkutsk had been diagnosed with “pneumonia of unknown aetiology.” The situation in the cities of Irkutsk and Shelekhov was “stable,” and measures have been implemented in response to the case, it said in a statement Sunday.

Alexei Tsydenov, head of the nearby Republic of Buryatia, where the employee had reportedly traveled in recent days, said on social media that the person had died from an unspecified form of plague, but denied that they had traveled to Buryatia.

CNBC has not been able to independently verify the reports. The Russian Ministry of Health didn’t immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

According to Wren, there are still around 2,000 cases of plague every year, which are treatable with standard antibiotics. “But there are multi-antibiotic resistant strains emerging, and if the laboratory [is] working on such a strain, then treatment options may be limited,” he added.

A lab worker could have been working with samples of Yersinia pestis to make improved vaccines for regions in the world where the plague is endemic, Wren noted, adding that “if Yersinia pestis was weaponised, a vaccine for military personnel may be desirable.”

Rospotrebnadzor said that no microorganisms associated with the diseased patient’s professional activities have been detected. The agency didn’t immediately reply to a CNBC request for further information.

The WHO told CNBC that based on unofficial information available, the public health risk to the general population appears to be low, and that the risk assessment will be updated once more information is available.

— CNBC’s Jenny Lee contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media