Connect with us

Technologies

I Tested the iPhone 16E and Pixel 9A Cameras and the Results Were Stunning

Camera comparison: I put Apple’s most affordable phone against Google’s and definitely came away with a winner.

Google has proved with the Pixel 9A that you can still take good-looking snaps and pay less than $500. Images from the phone look terrific and capture a lot of detail and texture. And Google’s algorithm secret sauce for capturing beautiful and natural complexions in portraits is on full display here.

Apple replaced its cheapest phone with the iPhone 16E. In doing so, it tried to pull some of the affordable photographic attention away from the Pixel. The iPhone 16E takes lovely photos, even with one fewer camera than the Pixel. Apple is well-known for pushing the limits of phone photography with the iPhone, but that is usually tied to its iPhone Pro line, which starts at $1,000. While $599 is Apple’s lowest price for a new phone, the iPhone 16E misses the Pixel 9A’s $500 sweet spot.

If you’re looking to save money by buying a base smartphone, are you giving up all hopes of taking good photos? The cameras on flagship phones like the iPhone 16 Pro and Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra are capable of astonishing results, but those and other best-camera options cost $1,000 and up. 

So that raises the question: Does a pricier phone take better photos?

To find out, I took the iPhone 16E and Pixel 9A around San Francisco and put them through a camera test. Several hundred photos later, I was surprised by the results, but I ended up with one being my favorite.

iPhone 16E and Pixel 9A camera specs

Camera Resolution Aperture Notes
Pixel 9A wide 48MP f/1.7 OIS
Pixel 9A ultrawide 13MP f/2.2 Takes 12MP photos
Pixel 9A selfie 13MP f/2.2 Fixed focus
iPhone 16E wide 48MP f/1.6 OIS
iPhone 16E selfie 12MP f/1.9 Autofocus

Right off the bat, this isn’t exactly a level playing field. The Pixel 9A has three cameras: a wide, ultrawide and selfie. The iPhone 16E only has two: a wide and selfie. Each phone’s main camera has a 48-megapixel sensor and groups four pixels together to create a “super” pixel that captures more light. That also means photos exhibit less image noise and therefore need less noise reduction, which can otherwise leave your pictures looking like a blurry, soft mess.

Both phones lack a dedicated telephoto camera and use sensor cropping to achieve a 2x magnification that in my testing looks pretty good.

The Pixel 9A has a “macro mode” and can focus on subjects that are close up. Interestingly, it doesn’t use its ultrawide camera for macro shots like many other phones do. Sadly, the iPhone 16E lacks a macro mode unlike the rest of its iPhone 16 brothers and sisters. However, I noticed that the main camera can take close up shots with the subject in-focus (maybe not as dramatically close as a dedicated macro mode allows for).

iPhone 16E vs. Pixel 9A: Photos

Take a look at some of my favorite photos from both phones.

iPhone 16E vs. Pixel 9A: Photo comparisons

In general, I found that the Pixel 9A really pushes the dynamic range in its images. The phone captures more details in the shadows but really aggressively brightens them too, like in the photos below of Maisie the cat. The iPhone 16E’s image of Maisie doesn’t have as much detail and texture in her fur. Somewhere in between the Pixel’s photo and the iPhone’s image is how the cat actually looked in real life.

I also find that the Pixel takes images with a cooler color temperature, while the iPhone’s photos have more contrast, especially outdoors. Take a look at the photos below of a brick building here in the Mission in San Francisco. Notice the bricks in each photo.

In terms of Portrait mode, neither the Pixel nor iPhone have a dedicated telephoto lens. And remember, the iPhone 16E has only a single rear camera, so it relies solely on AI and machine learning to determine the depth of a scene and create that artistic out-of-focus background.

The first thing I notice with the portrait mode photos below of CNET’s Faith Chihil is how differently the iPhone and Pixel handled the textures in the yellow sweater and green chair. The “cutout” (from in focus to out of focus) looks natural, except for the green chair in the iPhone’s photo. And Faith’s complexion looks most true to life in the Pixel 9A image. The iPhone 16E’s photo makes her skin look muddy and muted.

Something else I noticed is that the iPhone 16E’s portrait mode only works on humans; on the iPhone 16 and 16 Pro, animals are automatically recognized as portrait subjects. So, if you want dramatic-looking snaps with artistically blurred backgrounds of Fido or Mr. Cupcakes, then the Pixel is the way to go. Sorry for yet another cat photo, but check out the portrait mode snap below of Maise the cat.

Both phones take night mode images (Google calls them Night Sight photos). In the photos below of a space shuttle Lego set taken in a very dim room, neither of the images are great. The iPhone 16E’s photo has the least image noise, but the contrast is heavy. I prefer the Pixel 9A’s photo.

I also snapped images of a residential block at dusk where the street lights really make the iPhone’s night mode photo look orange. The iPhone’s image is brighter. But notice the details in the telephone wires across the top of the images below. The iPhone captures them as continuous lines, whereas the Pixel 9A’s image has them made up of tiny jagged line segments.

iPhone 16E vs. Pixel 9A: Which would I choose?

Overall, both phones have their shortcomings when it comes to photography. I don’t think most people would choose an affordable phone solely based on the camera’s performance. Be assured that if you get either phone, you’ll be able to take decent snaps with some images bordering on looking great.

The iPhone 16E costs more, lacks an ultrawide lens and, while the pictures it takes are decent, I think that the Pixel 9A’s cameras are great for a $500 phone, and would likely opt for it.

Technologies

What Amodei’s AI slowdown could mean for Anthropic’s imminent IPO

As Anthropic meets with prospective investors ahead of its potentially historic market debut, CEO Dario Amodei is pushing for a slowdown in AI.

Anthropic’s road to an IPO just got a lot bumpier.

While the Claude creator meets with prospective investors ahead of its potentially historic debut, co-founder and CEO Dario Amodei is pushing a concept that would seem to contradict those ambitious efforts: a slowdown.

Anthropic, valued at $965 billion earlier this year, confidentially filed its IPO prospectus in June, and has been widely expected to list its shares as soon as next month. Meanwhile, concerns about the power of advanced AI models has been intensifying for weeks, spilling into the mainstream as more researchers warn of potential threats of human extinction.

With that backdrop, Amodei wrote an essay over the weekend urging the AI industry to slow the pace of model development, proposing a three-step plan to temper how quickly model capabilities improve without “sacrificing commercial advantage or the United States’ lead in AI.”

It’s the latest challenge facing public market investors who are trying to determine what they’re willing to pay for a piece of a five-year-old company that’s already among the most valuable in the world and could seek a $2 trillion valuation in its IPO. Though Anthropic may have to accept a hit to revenue growth, some experts say an intentional slowdown could help Anthropic frame itself as a responsible actor, avoid future liability and address the public backlash towards AI that’s been brewing across the country.

“I don’t know that investors are necessarily going to see it as a negative,” Gil Luria, an equity analyst at D.A. Davidson, said in an interview. “Unless the companies are genuine and say, ‘OK, we’re not going to IPO, we’re not going to use any more compute, we’re not going to train any more models.’ That’s not what they’re saying.”

Anthropic has picked the Nasdaq as the exchange for its potential IPO, CNBC confirmed after Business Insider first reported the selection.

Amodei on Saturday proposed that model companies open up to third-party evaluators, frontier companies establish “common safety standards,” and that democratic countries coordinate with authoritarian governments “to the extent this is possible.”

His essay came after several industry researchers issued stern warnings last week about the technology’s growing potential to cause catastrophic harms.

President Donald Trump slammed Amodei in a post on Truth Social on Monday, writing that the only “control or ’guardrails’ that AI needs is a STRONG AND SMART (High IQ!) PRESIDENT, and the U.S.A. has that, in spades!”

“The Trump Administration has stopped AI ‘people’ from doing bad, or potentially bad, ‘things,” like Dario (Anthropic!), who is now pretending to be a ‘perfect little angel’ – and we will continue to do so!,” Trump wrote. “We already have tremendous CRIMINAL and REGULATORY power over these companies!”

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman expressed support for Amodei’s proposal, as did Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX, which owns Grok creator xAI. SpaceX went public in June in the biggest IPO on record and is now valued at $2 trillion. OpenAI has confidentially filed its IPO prospectus, but has been under fire in recent months after its models escaped containment, accessed the open internet and breached open-source developer platform Hugging Face.

“Right now would be an ill-advised moment to go public,” Altman said in an interview with Fortune, reiterating that OpenAI won’t aim for an IPO until next year. Finance chief Sarah Friar told employees during an all-hands meeting last month that the AI lab “will be a public company in 2027.”

Lise Buyer, partner at IPO advisory firm Class V Group, said she doesn’t see the recent “we might obliterate you all” fears having an impact on IPO timing, but it could alter valuations, she said.

“The bet here is on the long term — now with tempering thoughts about control of the technology,” Buyer said in an email. “The dramatic growth and possibilities of these companies, now more publicly coupled with the potential very serious concerns and risks, will likely persist whether the IPO happens in Q4 or next year or whenever.”

Anthropic and OpenAI declined to comment for this story.

â€ČDon’t see why growth would slow’

Anthropic hit $65 billion in annualized revenue in July, about a sevenfold increase from the prior year, as CNBC previously reported. The company has told some shareholders that it will generate an operating profit for a second straight quarter in the current period, according to two sources familiar who asked not to be named because the details are confidential. The Financial Times earlier reported the operating profit on Sunday.

Matt Murphy, a partner at Menlo Ventures and an Anthropic investor, called the growth rate “off the charts,” and said a public listing would bring more transparency around the business.

“Don’t see why growth would slow or any other reason to wait,” Murphy told CNBC.

That transparency could also help improve what has been dismal public sentiment around the technology.

More than half of Americans say they’re more concerned than excited about the growing use of AI in daily life, up from 37% in 2021, according to a recent report from the Pew Research Center. And confidence in AI executives is even worse, according to a CNBC Generation Lab survey of 18- to 34-year-olds. More than 75% of respondents said they don’t trust Amodei to act responsibly, while around 70% expressed those views about Altman.

“One could argue that sooner is better than later for a public offering as the accountability that comes with being a public company might be of a great interest to many,” Class V Group’s Buyer said.

Altimeter Capital CEO Brad Gerstner, whose firm is an investor in Anthropic and OpenAI, said in a post on X on Saturday that bringing more “transparency, scrutiny, accountability” and participation to AI companies is “crucial.” He said Anthropic will likely forge ahead with its IPO.

“The market knows how to price risk – see SpaceX,” Gerstner wrote. “There is huge appetite to invest in the AI leaders.”

Gerstner’s post came a day after he blasted public remarks from industry researchers, calling them “hyperbolic scare tactics” that are “hiding behind a political agenda,” in an interview with CNBC.

There are plenty of skeptics when it comes to Amodei’s latest positioning. One argument is that Anthropic benefits from stricter standards because it currently has the most advanced models and makes money from selling services, like Claude Code, that are powered by those models.

“That could actually favor Anthropic and OpenAI if smaller competitors cannot afford the rigorous safety, evaluation and security investments required for frontier-level models,” Arun Chandrasekaran, an analyst at Gartner, told CNBC in an email.

D.A. Davidson’s Luria agrees and said he thinks Anthropic and OpenAI are engaging in “monopolistic behavior.” OpenAI has reportedly asked members of Congress for guidance about whether a coordinated, industrywide slowdown would violate antitrust law, according to Wired.

“I’m highly suspicious of what Anthropic and OpenAI are doing,” Luria said. “It feels more and more like a ladder pull.”

What about the rest of tech?

Tech investors have other reasons to worry about the pace of development at OpenAI and Anthropic, because those companies are responsible for an outsized amount of AI infrastructure spending.

Anthropic has inked a flurry of multibillion-dollar compute deals this year, including with Nscale, Advanced Micro Devices, SpaceX, and Google. OpenAI told investors in February that it’s targeting roughly $600 billion in total compute spend by 2030. Both companies are heavy users of Nvidia’s graphics processing units.

“I would want to understand how the mix shifts between frontier training, post-training and inference as safety controls are integrated,” said Lo Toney, managing partner at Plexo Capital, and an Anthropic investor.

PitchBook analyst Harrison Rolfes is more concerned about reduced growth. He said valuations for model companies likely deserve a discount now, largely because it’s hard for investors to trust that they can safely commercialize their technology.

“Is the first thing that you want to do as a public company go handle a bunch of security issues and vulnerability issues?” Rolfes said. “No, you probably want to focus on expanding into all the markets that you promised all your investors.”

Gene Munster, managing partner at Deepwater Asset Management, told CNBC that any sort of perceived slowdown will be a negative because the market is “underwriting exponential uninterrupted improvements to the models.”

Still, Munster predicted that “nothing will change and the AI leapfrog game will continue.”

“AI’s long-term opportunity is too big for them to slow down,” Munster said. “I believe the comments were motivated to reduce the regulatory pressure.”

WATCH: Seems like Anthropic will beat OpenAI to IPO, says FirstMark’s Rick Heitzmann

Continue Reading

Technologies

Iran Claims It Shot Down Advanced U.S. Drone Above Hormuz as Regional Conflict Escalates

Iran said its new aerospace defense system shot down an advanced MQ-1 drone over the Strait of Hormuz as the widening conflict disrupted shipping and pushed crude above $100 a barrel.

Iran’s military said it had destroyed an advanced American drone over the Strait of Hormuz, marking the latest exchange of warnings and strikes between Tehran and Washington as neither side shows signs of backing down.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said Monday that its “new advanced aerospace defense system” intercepted and shot down the MQ-1 drone above the strait, but offered no additional information about its mission. General Atomics manufactures the MQ-1, which has historically been operated primarily by the U.S. Air Force and CIA.

The incident came after a series of Iranian operations targeting U.S. unmanned naval systems in the Gulf. The war, now entering its seventh month, has shown little sign of easing, while diplomacy over the strategically vital waterway remains stalled.

On Sunday, President Donald Trump said the U.S. could continue its campaign against Iran and take control of its oil, comparing the possibility with the arrangement Washington reached with Venezuela earlier this year.

Speaking at the Irish Open golf championship in Ireland, Trump said the U.S. would eventually leave the war unless it chose to remain and retain access to oil, as it did under the Venezuela arrangement. He said revenue from that agreement, which gave Washington access to roughly one-fifth of Venezuela’s oil reserves, had “paid for the war many times.”

Under the August agreement, Venezuela transferred majority U.S. control of more than 65 billion barrels of oil reserves—more than twice America’s own reserves—in return for $209 billion for the state treasury. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the deal would also attract nearly $100 billion in private investment to revive the economy.

Trump said on Sunday that he expects the seven-month Iran war to end this year, potentially after the November midterm elections, and maintained that gasoline prices would “drop like a rock” once peace arrives.

The president said he would accept only the “right deal” and claimed Tehran had been “calling constantly” for peace negotiations, a claim Iran has previously rejected.

Hormuz Negotiations Stalled

A planned meeting in Oman between Gulf states and Iran to discuss potential agreements governing the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial route for global oil and gas shipments, has been postponed, Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said on X on Sunday. He cited the need for “consensus.”

Officials from Iran and Gulf countries were expected to meet Monday and sign an agreement creating an Iran-Oman shipping route through the Strait of Hormuz, although no direct U.S.-Iran talks were taking place.

Since the war began in February, the Strait of Hormuz has faced an Iranian blockade followed by a U.S. naval blockade, helping keep global energy prices elevated.

A June agreement between Washington and Tehran broke down over disputes concerning the waterway. Meanwhile, a sustained offensive by Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthi rebels in recent days has strengthened the group’s leverage over another critical shipping route, the Bab el-Mandeb.

Iranian strikes regularly target vessels considered non-compliant, while the U.S. periodically bombs sections of the Iranian coastline to challenge the Islamic Republic’s control of the strait.

Oil prices climbed above $100 a barrel again for the first time since May and rose further on Monday after Saudi Arabia shut a major east-west energy pipeline following damage caused by Iraqi drones.

U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures gained 2.3% to $102.39 a barrel. Brent crude, the international benchmark, rose 2.4% to $107.11 a barrel.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Sam Altman Details Potential Risks of Rapid AI Advancement, Calls for Industry Pace

OpenAI chief Sam Altman has outlined potential dangers of rapid AI advancement and advocated for an industry-wide slowdown to prevent catastrophic outcomes.

OpenAI chief Sam Altman has made his most detailed comments yet on how artificial intelligence safety frameworks could work, after he joined Anthropic’s Dario Amodei and Elon Musk in calling for an industry slowdown over the weekend.

Safety concerns over the technology have hit fever pitch since an Anthropic researcher quit last week, warning that those building it believed that it could “kill us all by the end of the decade” and prompting other employees at the lab and rival OpenAI to warn of catastrophic risks.

AI bosses have since shown a rare display of unity, with both Altman and Musk on Saturday backing an essay from Amodei that urged AI companies to slow how quickly they improve their most advanced models.

AI stocks were down Monday as investors digested the comments. U.S. President Donald Trump dismissed the CEOs’ warning on Sunday, saying a slowdown was not needed and would jeopardize America’s lead in AI over China.

Sam Altman sets out 2 ways AI could go ‘very badly’

“We welcome a federal framework that sets consistent safety requirements for frontier AI,” Altman said in a post on X just after midnight on Monday, adding that “no amount of American competitive pressure should justify recklessness.”

Altman warned of two ways AI progress could go “very badly,” including losing “control of the future to AI” and too much power concentrating around a single person or company.

Meanwhile, lawmakers in Washington are scrambling to address calls for safeguards.

This all comes as Anthropic and OpenAI gear up for what’s expected to be historic initial public offerings. Altman ruled out going public in 2026 in an interview with Fortune published Saturday.

Amodei’s three-step proposal

Many AI safety fears revolve around models developing the ability to improve their own performance, a technique known as recursive self-improvement, or RSI.

“Since roughly this summer, AI has been advancing drastically faster, driven primarily by AI’s growing ability to build the next generation of AI,” said Amodei in his essay. “Left unchecked, it could outrun our ability to understand and control these systems, and so must be pursued very carefully, if at all.”

Amodei proposed a three-step plan aimed at tempering the pace of development without “sacrificing commercial advantage or the United States’ lead in AI.”

The plan involves each frontier AI company giving “employee-like access” to external evaluators — which he said Anthropic was committing to now. Amodei also called for frontier AI labs to establish common safety standards, limit the rate of unchecked AI progress and attempt to coordinate efforts globally.

On Saturday, Altman said in a brief X post he agreed with Amodei that AI companies should “pace the frontier.” He added that “committing to having independent evaluators with employee-like access is a great idea, and we will do the same.”

“Consistent rules to manage frontier risk so that we can maximize the benefits are a good idea (and we are excited by ideas like independent auditors),” Altman said in his Monday post. But, he added, “When we talk about ‘pacing,’ we do not mean ‘stopping.’ Progress has been rapid and will continue to be.”

“Pacing will be well worth this cost; no amount of American competitive pressure should justify recklessness, or let capabilities get ahead of alignment and monitoring,” he concluded.

“Where we will need the help of our government is for international coordination. But first we should do what we can ourselves.”

International cooperation

Coordinating AI safety measures and an industry slowdown with rival AI developers in China will likely pose big challenges.

The U.S. and China remain locked in a battle for AI supremacy, with tensions ratcheting up as Chinese models have become more advanced and their global adoption grows.

Amodei said Sunday that the “toughest dilemma” about his proposal is what happens if adversarial nations choose not to do the same.

“The more long-term thing would be working together to put a speed limit on the rate of AI progress,” Amodei told CBS News’ “Sunday Morning.”

“I think that’s going to be very difficult because the incentives to pull ahead and the military advantage that you get from that are so large. And honestly, I don’t know if it’s possible, but we should try.”

The Anthropic CEO’s essay has drawn criticism in China, with the state-owned Global Times writing on Monday that “Amodei’s proposals seek to portray China’s legitimate development in AI as a threat and further fuel confrontation between China and the US in the field.”

China’s Foreign Ministry said on Monday that the CEOs’ comments were “fearmongering.”

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media