Connect with us

Technologies

Camera Comparison: Google Pixel Fold vs. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 4

It isn’t as close a competition as you might expect.

The new Google Pixel Fold costs $1,799 and has five cameras, just like the 11-month old Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 4. As you might infer from their names, each phone’s key feature is a foldable screen — which is largely the reason for their high prices. But a close second would be the cameras.

Neither the Pixel Fold or the Galaxy Z Fold 4 set any high marks for camera performance. The already tiny image sensors and lenses on regular phones are even smaller here, because the ultrathin bodies on these folding phones have less room.

But with such high prices, you’d be right to still expect these phones to be able to take some decent shots on your travels, so I was curious to see how they compare. And after a week of taking photos and videos on the Pixel Fold and Galaxy Z Fold 4, the results were not as close as I expected.

I should note that later in July, Samsung is holding an Unpacked event where we expect the company to announce the next-gen Galaxy Z Fold. Once it does, we will happily pit the new Z Fold against the Pixel Fold.

In the meantime, let’s dig into the details.

Read more: Best Camera Phone of 2023

Pixel Fold camera specs vs. Galaxy Z Fold 4

Both the Pixel Fold and Galaxy Z Fold 4 have three rear cameras, one cover screen camera and one interior screen camera. Resolution-wise it’s pretty close between what Google and Samsung each offer. I’d be remiss if I didn’t tell you that comparing image sensor resolution is like trying to compare the calories in food; 100 calories of broccoli has different benefits than 100 calories of ice cream. So yeah, more megapixels isn’t always better. The biggest differences are actually in the software processing, which Google seems to be better at.

The hardware is nearly identical in terms of specs, with the Pixel Fold having a 48-megapixel sensor, while the Z Fold 4 rocks a 50-megapixel sensor. 

Google Pixel Fold camera specs vs. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 4

Google Pixel Fold Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 4
Main camera f1.7 aperture, 48MP sensor f1.8 aperture, 50MP sensor
Ultra wide camera f2.2 aperture, 10.8MP sensor f2.2 aperture, 12MP sensor
Telephoto camera f3.05 aperture, 10.8MP sensor f2.4 aperture, 10MP sensor
Cover screen camera f2.2 aperture, 9.5MP sensor f2.2 aperture, 10MP sensor
Interior screen camera f2 aperture, 8MP sensor f1.8 aperture, 4MP sensor

The interior screen cameras are also different, with the Pixel sporting an 8-megapixel sensor and the Galaxy having just a 4-megapixel one. Samsung’s camera is buried under the display, however, which is brilliant. It’s the camera you use the least, and I think Samsung was wise to improve the inner display experience by «hiding» the camera, even if it comes with the trade-off of a lower-resolution sensor.

The last main hardware difference is the telephoto camera, which on the Pixel Fold has a 5x optical zoom, while the Z Fold 4 has a 3x optical zoom.

Google's Pixel Fold phone

Pixel Fold photos vs. Galaxy Z Fold 4

Before we get into some direct comparisons, take a look at some of my favorite photos from the Pixel Fold and the Z Fold 4.

A photo of a man sitting on a bench
A photo of the Moulin Rouge curtain on Broadway
A photo of flowers
A photo of clouds and the ground taken out of an airplane window
A photo of a woman pointing at what's written on her sweatshirt
A photo of a cat sitting in a window
A photo of a flower
A photo of a person standing in front of a building

On the whole, Pixel Fold photos have better detail, a wider dynamic range and are more color accurate. And that’s even under a perfect summer day with blue skies, which is one of the most forgiving environments for any phone camera.

Take a look at the images below, each taken with the main camera, of a lunch area in Salesforce Park in San Francisco. The Pixel Fold’s snap balances the exposure better and has more details in the grass and tree leaves. And, yes, things were actually that green. But Samsung’s photo is messy. It’s overly bright, details are muddy and the color temperature is off — notice the green in the trees in the background and the sky.

Below are two more images from the main cameras. This time the differences aren’t quite as drastic. Both phones did a good job of capturing the cappuccino’s texture in the foam. But notice around the rim of the cup. The Pixel Fold’s photo looks more natural, with the cup’s rim in focus along with the top of the drink. The Z Fold 4’s image is strange. I know Samsung has a food optimizer setting, but I don’t remember it being on; it might have been. The edge of the cup is soft.

Next, take a look at the photos below, which were taken indoors under a mix of window light and low light. Here’s where the differences between Google and Samsung are huge. In Google’s photo of Peebles the cat, it handles the mixed light well, but captures some texture in his fur and whiskers. The photo is soft, but not in a bad way. Samsung’s photo looks bad. It suffers from over brightening, and is marred by a ton of image noise and heavy noise reduction, which makes the photo of Peebles look like a painting of Peebles.

Pixel Fold zoom vs. Galaxy Z Fold 4

Based purely on the specs, the Pixel Fold has the edge when it comes to zoom, since it has a 5x optical telephoto lens compared to the 3x on the Z Fold 4. That 5x is the sweet spot, helping you get closer to your subject without being in someone’s face.

Take a look at the zoom range on each phone.

A photo of a building

At 5x it’s hard to tell any real differences between the two, aside from some loss of resolution on the Galaxy Z Fold because of the digital zoom.

Below are 10x digital zoom photos from both phones. Neither one looks great.

And last are photos taken at the max digital zoom magnifications on each phone: 20x on the Pixel and 30x on the Samsung. Despite the different magnifications, both have roughly the same amount of zoom/crop.

Samsung’s image has completely fallen apart and looks super soft and processed. The Pixel Fold’s photo isn’t great, but looks better thanks to Google’ Super Res Zoom, which uses a combination of hardware, software and AI to make it look better.

Pixel Fold night mode vs. Galaxy Z Fold 4

Moving on to night mode, things start to swing back in Samsung’s favor. Below are images of some apartment buildings taken an hour after sunset with night mode. Both look good, but the one from the Z Fold 4 looks better overall. The Galaxy phone protects the highlights better in the moon and in light sources like at the entrance of the apartment building in the middle. 

Below are two more night mode shots. Again, both are good, though I like the one from the Galaxy Z Fold 4 more. The white balance is more true to the scene.

Pixel Fold selfies vs. Galaxy Z Fold 4

You have the option on both phones to take selfies several different ways. The first is using the cover screen camera on each phone. In the photos below, I think Samsung’s cover screen camera takes better selfies than the Pixel Fold’s cover screen camera. It does a better job at nailing focus and I like the brighter exposure.

Because these are foldable phones, you can also take a selfie with the main rear camera using the cover screen as a preview. I do like being able to use the rear camera to take selfies, but it feels like more of a chore. Between the two images below, I like the rear camera selfie from the Z Fold 4 better, since the brightness is more flattering.

There is a third way to take a selfie and that’s to use the inner display’s camera. Both the Pixel Fold and Z Fold 4’s inner screen camera are meant for video calls, so I tested them in the video that accompanies this article. Neither look good for a Zoom call, but the higher resolution on the Pixel Fold’s inside screen camera gives it a slight edge.

A photo of a video call

Pixel Fold videos vs. Galaxy Z Fold 4 and final thoughts

On the whole, videos aren’t great from either phone. Video recordings suffer from image noise and have less dynamic range than photos from each phone. Most of the machine learning algorithms and artificial intelligence Google and Samsung use in their photos is absent for videos. If you want to see sample video clips from each phone, please watch the video attached to this story.

So which phone has the best cameras? Neither the Pixel Fold or Z Fold 4 offer top-of-the-line phone cameras. But as far as these two phones go, I lean towards Google’s device more than Samsung’s (purely in terms of the cameras). The Z Fold 4, however, has an edge in other ways like the amazing inside screen, the premium fit and finish of the hardware and the software that seemed less fussy than the Pixel Fold.

Remember each of these phones costs $200 shy of two grand. For that price you get a phone that folds in half, that has two screens and five cameras. While the big interior screens of these foldables are great for editing your photos, few foldables offer the pristine image quality you’d find on their nonfolding counterparts. You should still look towards Samsung’s Galaxy S23 Ultra or Google’s Pixel 7 Pro if you want amazing imaging skills, but you’ll have to decide what your priority is: beautiful photos or an exciting folding screen? Right now, you can’t have both.

Just know that a month from now, things could change with the launch of the rumored Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 5.

Technologies

Let T-Mobile Pick Up the Tab. Get a Free iPhone 17 With a New Line

If you’ve been looking to add a new line or switch carriers, you can scoop up Apple’s latest flagship on T-Mobile’s dime.

Apple’s new iPhone 17 typically costs $830 for the 256GB configuration, or up to $1,030 for the 512GB configuration. However, T-Mobile isoffering it to customers for free if they meet certain qualifications. If you’ve been looking to trade in your old device or choose an eligible plan, now is a great time to nab this deal.

T-Mobile doesn’t mention a deadline for this deal’s end, but it’s best to act fast if you’ve been wanting the latest iPhone.

To get a free iPhone 17, you’ll need to switch to T-Mobile on an Experience Beyond or Experience More plan and open a new line. You can also choose a Better Value plan, but you must add at least three lines with that plan to get your phone. You can also add a new line on a qualifying plan to score the deal, so long as you also have an eligible device to trade in.

Buyers are still responsible for the $35 activation fee. You’ll get bill credits for 24 months that amount to your phone’s cost. Additionally, you can only get up to four devices with a new line on a qualifying plan.

Note that newer phones will net you more trade-in credits, but an iPhone 6 will net you at least $400 off. The iPhone 17 Pro is also free with a trade-in of an eligible device on an Experience Beyond plan. The iPhone 17 Pro Max is just over $4 per month right now, with the same qualifications.

We’ve also got a list of the best phone deals, if you’d like to shop around.

Why this deal matters

The iPhone 17 series is the latest in Apple’s ecosystem. These smartphones are made to work with Apple Intelligence, include faster chips, offer improved camera performance and show off Apple’s trademark gorgeous design. Starting at $830, they’re not the cheapest phones around, so carrier deals like this one are the best way to save some serious cash.

Continue Reading

Technologies

How Team USA’s Olympic Skiers and Snowboarders Got an Edge From Google AI

Google engineers hit the slopes with Team USA’s skiers and snowboarders to build a custom AI training tool.

Team USA’s skiers and snowboarders are going home with some new hardware, including a few gold medals, from the 2026 Olympics. Along with the years of hard work that go into being an Olympic athlete, this year’s crew had an extra edge in their training thanks to a custom AI tool from Google Cloud.

US Ski and Snowboard, the governing body for the US national teams, oversees the training of the best skiers and snowboarders in the country to prepare them for big events, such as national championships and the Olympics. The organization partnered with Google Cloud to build an AI tool to offer more insight into how athletes are training and performing on the slopes.

Video review is a big part of winter sports training. A coach will literally stand on the sidelines recording an athlete’s run, then review the footage with them afterward to spot errors. But this process is somewhat dated, Anouk Patty, chief of sport at US Ski and Snowboard, told me. That’s where Google came in, bringing new AI-powered data insights to the training process.

Google Cloud engineers hit the slopes with the skiers and snowboarders to understand how to build an actually useful AI model for athletic training. They used video footage as the base of the currently unnamed AI tool. Gemini did a frame-by-frame analysis of the video, which was then fed into spatial intelligence models from Google DeepMind. Those models were able to take the 2D rendering of the athlete from the video and transform it into a 3D skeleton of an athlete as they contort and twist on runs. 

Final touches from Gemini help the AI tool analyze the physics in the pixels, according to Ravi Rajamani, global head of Google’s AI Blackbelt team. which worked on the project. Coaches and athletes told the engineers the specific metrics they wanted to track — speed, rotation, trajectory — and the Google engineers coded the model to make it easy to monitor them and compare between different videos. There’s also a chat interface to ask Gemini questions about performance.

«From just a video, we are actually able to recreate it in 3D, so you don’t need expensive equipment, [like] sensors, that get in the way of an athlete performing,» Rajamani said.

Coaches are undeniably the experts on the mountain, but the AI can act as a kind of gut check. The data can help confirm or deny what coaches are seeing and give them extra insight into the specifics of each athlete’s performance. It can catch things that humans would struggle to see with the naked eye or in poor video quality, like where an athlete was looking while doing a trick and the exact speed and angle of a rotation. 

«It’s data that they wouldn’t otherwise have,» Patty said. The 3D skeleton is especially helpful because it makes it easier to see movement obscured by the puffy jackets and pants athletes wear, she said. 

For elite athletes in skiing and snowboarding, making small adjustments can mean the difference between a gold medal and no medal at all. Technological advances in training are meant to help athletes get every available tool for improvement.

«You’re always trying to find that 1% that can make the difference for an athlete to get them on the podium or to win,» Patty said. It can also democratize coaching. «It’s a way for every coach who’s out there in a club working with young athletes to have that level of understanding of what an athlete should do that the national team athletes have.»

For Google, this purpose-built AI tool is «the tip of the iceberg,» Rajamani said. There are a lot of potential future use cases, including expanding the base model to be customized to other sports. It also lays the foundation for work in sports medicine, physical therapy, robotics and ergonomics — disciplines where understanding body positioning is important. But for now, there’s satisfaction in knowing the AI was built to actually help real athletes.

«This was not a case of tech engineers building something in the lab and handing it over,» Rajamani said. «This is a real-world problem that we are solving. For us, the motivation was building a tool that provides a true competitive advantage for our athletes.»

Continue Reading

Technologies

Virtual Boy Review: Nintendo’s Oddest Switch Accessory Yet Is an Immersive ’90s Museum

No one needs a Virtual Boy. But I always wanted one. And now it’s living with me at last.

On my desk is a Nintendo device that looks like equipment stolen from a cyberpunk optical shop. It’s big, it’s red and black, it sits on a tripod, it has an eyepiece, and it has a Nintendo Switch 2 nestled inside. Hello, Virtual Boy, you’re back.

Nintendo has made a lot of weird consoles over the years, but the Virtual Boy was the weirdest. And the shortest lived. Released in 1995 and discontinued a year later, it lived for a blink of an eye during my final year in college. I never really had time to consider buying one.

It would have been perfect for me, a Game Boy fan who was in love with the idea of VR even back then. Nintendo has been flirting with virtual reality in various forms for decades, and the Virtual Boy was the biggest swing. But it wasn’t VR at all, really. It was a 3D game console in red and black monochrome, a 3D Game Boy in tripod form.

I’m setting the stage because right now you can order a $100 Virtual Boy recreation that’s a big, strange Switch accessory. It’s staring at me now, taking up a lot of space. It’s too big to fit in a bag. It’s a tabletop console, really, and Nintendo has created this Virtual Boy viewer as a way to play a set of free-with-subscription games on the Switch and Switch 2.

Is it worth your money? I’d call it a museum-piece collectible, not a serious piece of gaming hardware. Still, my kid stuck his head in, played 3D Wario Land, and came out declaring it was really cool. He loves old retro games. But I don’t know how often he’ll pop his head back in.

Nintendo’s first stab at 3D now feels like a museum piece

For comparison, I pulled my old Nintendo 3DS XL out of the drawer where it had been tucked away and booted it up, marveling again that Nintendo actually made a glasses-free 3D game handheld once upon a time. The 3DS is a far more capable and advanced game system, but consider the Virtual Boy an ancient attempt to get there first. 

The Virtual Boy was a monochrome red-and-black LED display system, a tabletop-only device that was neither handheld nor TV-connected. The Nintendo Switch’s tabletop-style game modes feel like a bit of an evolutionary link to the Virtual Boy, so it’s poetic that the Switch pops into the new Virtual Boy to power the games and provide the display.

The plastic Virtual Boy is just an odd set of VR goggles for the Switch, but with a red filter on the lenses. Also, you can’t wear it. You keep your head stuck in it.

Awkward and easy to use

All the trappings on this recreation look like the old Virtual Boy but don’t work: You can see a simulated headphone jack, controller port, a sort of knob on top. I just unsnap the plastic case and slide the Switch in, carefully, and then snap it back over. That’s all it is.

To control it, you use the Switch controllers detached or another Switch-compatible controller. Launching the Virtual Boy app — free on the eShop, but you need a Switch Online Plus Expansion Pack account, which costs $50 a year, or $80 for a family membership — splits the Switch display into two smaller, distorted screens. In the Virtual Boy, it looks properly 3D. When I’m done playing, I pop the Switch back out.

As I said in my first hands-on, the big foam-covered eyepiece is more than wide enough for big glasses, and was fine to dip my face into. Getting a comfortable angle to stay playing for a while is another challenge. The Virtual Boy’s included tripod-like stand can adjust the angle, but not as wide as I’d like. I’m sort of hunched over while playing, which gives me a bit of pain. Leaning on the table with my controllers in hand helps.

The red-lensed front eyepiece can be removed, and a later software update will allow Virtual Boy games to be played in several color mixes beyond red and black. Also, you can unscrew an inner bracket to hold the Switch 2 and swap in an included Switch-sized bracket instead. The Switch Lite doesn’t work with the Virtual Boy, however.

The weirdness is my type of indie

All you get right now are seven of the 16 games Nintendo has promised to release for the Virtual Boy. Believe it or not, there were only 22 games ever released for this system. The 16 will include two that were never released before, which is a fun collector’s novelty. 

But what’s amazing to me now is that, sinking into these oddball retro games with their pixelated NES-slash-Game Boy aesthetics in red and black, they feel weirdly timely. The janky, oddball, almost-parallel-universe Nintendo vibe feels like the indie retro aesthetic that’s been big for a while now. After all these years, is the Virtual Boy now finally awesome?

Games like UFO 50 (a compilation of new indie games made to feel like an archive of ’80s games for a console that never was) and indie consoles like Panic Playdate (still my favorite black and white mini handheld, a home for all sorts of homebrew retro games) match my feeling diving into these Virtual Boy games and figuring them out.

Wario Land is probably the best: A side-scrolling Wario game with multiple depth levels, it gives me Game Boy Mario game vibes. Golf has multiple holes and an aiming system, and it’s relaxed and basic (and hard to perfect). 3D Tetris has you dropping blocks down a well to fill in layers, with a Tron-like puzzle feel. Red Alert’s wireframe 3D shooter design is like Star Fox, but boiled all the way down to simple vector lines. Galactic Pinball has several tables, and it’s some lovely, very old-school 3D Nintendo pinball fun. Teleroboxer is Punch-Out with robots, with a style that also reminds me of the early Switch game Arms. And The Mansion of Innsmouth is a creepy 3D dungeon-crawling game (in Japanese) where you try to get to exits before time runs out… or monsters get you.

The remaining games coming this year include Mario Tennis, another Tetris game, a wireframe 3D racer, a 3D reinvention of the original Mario Bros. game called Mario Clash and a 3D Space Invaders. By the end of Nintendo’s release schedule, a good chunk of Virtual Boy’s catalog will be there.

A novelty that’s niche as hell

Worth it? Again, if you love weird and retro, and are intrigued by lost Nintendo 3D games, then yes. But if you’re looking for cutting-edge, then no.

Keep in mind: You can buy a cheaper $25 cardboard set of goggles for the Switch that lets you play the Virtual Boy games, too (or use the old Labo VR goggles Nintendo made in 2019, if you have them). That’s a more sensible path. There are even unofficial emulators for Virtual Boy games on the Meta Quest and Apple Vision Pro. But who said the Virtual Boy was sensible?

A Nintendo game system that’s a big set of red goggles on a tripod is inherently absurd. And I welcome its weird footprint in my home, because that’s exactly who I am. But it’s also a testament to Nintendo’s perpetual interest in the bleeding edge of gaming. VR, glasses-free 3D, AR, modular consoles… Nintendo’s poking around the edges. 

Is the Virtual Boy a sign that Nintendo could make its own VR or AR game system again someday soon, or as an extension of the Switch 2? Who knows? Shigeru Miyamoto, Nintendo’s legendary video game designer, sounded intrigued and elusive about it when I asked him last year. But there’s never any real way to guess where Nintendo’s heading. The Virtual Boy is a museum-piece reminder of that.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media