Connect with us

Technologies

iPhone 15 Pro Max Camera vs. Galaxy S23 Ultra: Which Is Best?

Apple’s latest iPhone has an amazing camera. But then, so does Samsung’s. Here’s our expert comparison.

The iPhone 15 Pro Max has one of the best cameras it’s possible to get on any phone, with its main camera and new 5x telephoto zoom lens letting you snag incredible images in any conditions. It’s an overall photography beast, but it isn’t the only great camera phone to buy. Samsung’s Galaxy S23 Ultra has remained one of our top picks for photographers since it launched earlier this year. It can take glorious images, and its 10x zoom offers even more creative options. 

But how do these two phones compare when it comes to photo-shooting prowess? To find out, I put both devices through their paces in a series of tests in London and Edinburgh, including night mode imagery, zoom tests and portrait mode challenges. 

Read more: Best camera phone

The long story short is that both phones are incredibly capable when it comes to taking photos that’ll wow your Instagram followers, but read on to see how each phone fares under different conditions.

boathouse-normal-iphone
boathouse-normal-s23-ultra

Both phones have captured this bright, vibrant scene well with their main cameras. But the iPhone 15 Pro Max has produced more realistic colors in both the sky and in the main building to the left of the scene. The S23 Ultra’s sky looks particularly oversaturated , with a yellow tinge to the scene that I’m less keen on.

boathouse-wide-iphone
boathouse-wide-s23-ultra

It’s the same story when switching to each phone’s wide-angle lens. The S23 Ultra’s shot is more vibrant, but it looks almost unnaturally saturated as a result. The iPhone 15 Pro Max’s shot looks almost a little drab by comparison, but I prefer its more faithful reproduction of colors. 

bridge-iphone
bridge-s23-ultra

Beyond a slight shift in white balance, there’s very little to choose between either shot here. 

pink-flowers-normal-iphone
pink-flowers-s23-ultra

I focused closer-up on these pretty pink flowers using the main cameras on each phone, and the iPhone is the clear winner. It’s provided an attractive out-of-focus bokeh to the background, while keeping the subject looking nice and sharp, which helps the foreground flowers stand out. The S23 Ultra doesn’t have the same depth effect and its colors are extremely saturated. The green leaves to the bottom left of the image in particular look almost toxic against the iPhone’s much more realistic tones. 

power-iphone
power-s23-ultra

Color balance isn’t an issue here, with both phones producing well-exposed shots and the vibrant artwork on this bridge looking well-produced in both images. 

beer-iphone
beer-s23-ultra

There’s not a lot of immediate difference here, so I really have to nitpick to draw any conclusion. On the one hand, I slightly prefer the brighter, higher-contrast exposure the S23 Ultra has managed. However, the iPhone 15 Pro Max has a more attractive shallow depth of field, with softer bokeh noticeable on the chairs and light sources in the background. As a result, we can call this one a tie. 

flats-wide-iphone
flats-wide-s23-ultra

Switching to the ultrawide cameras on both phones, the big difference is the shift in white balance on the S23 Ultra. Samsung’s phone has opted for an image with a strong magenta color cast that I’m not particularly keen on. While the iPhone’s shot is a little darker, its color tone is much more accurate. 

portrait-1x-iphone-2
portrait-1x-s23-ultra

Both phones have portrait modes that can be used with different lenses but still capture that attractive bokeh effect around your subject. Taken with the standard 1x lenses, the S23’s shot is wider than the iPhone’s, while also producing richer contrast and stronger colors. The iPhone’s looks quite washed out, either due to lens flare or simply through software processing, and the result is disappointing. 

portrait-5x-iphone
portrait-3x-s23-ultra

Things change when we look at the zoomed-in shots. The iPhone Pro Max’s 5x zoom lens has captured a lovely portrait here, with great exposure and a really natural-looking bokeh around the subject that could easily have been taken on a DSLR with a telephoto zoom. The S23 Ultra’s shot still looks good though, with rich contrast and deep colors. 

boathouse-5x-iphone
boathouse-3x-s23-ultra
boathouse-10x-s23-ultra

The iPhone 15 Pro Max’s 5x zoom has delivered a much better-looking shot than the S23 Ultra’s 3x lens, with more natural-looking colors and exposure. Things improve for the S23 Ultra at 10x zoom though, with a far nicer color tone overall, not to mention being able to see more detail on the sign, thanks to the longer zoom range. 

flats-5x-iphone
flats-10x-s23-ultra

The S23 Ultra’s extended zoom range can be beneficial, especially for those occasions where you really want to fill your frame with a distant subject. However, I personally find 5x to be a real sweet spot. It allows me to find more interesting compositions than I could with a wide-angle lens, but without being too restrictive. 

That’s why I prefer the iPhone 15 Pro Max in this scenario rather than the Galaxy S23 Ultra’s closer 10x zoom. This largely comes down to personal preference, of course, but I find the iPhone’s zoom (as I did with the Pixel 7 Pro’s 5x zoom) much more useful on a day-to-day basis. 

Night mode

roseleaf-iphone
roseleaf-normal-s23

Both the iPhone 15 Pro Max and Galaxy S23 Ultra can take excellent shots after dark, and these images from the main camera are fine examples. That said, the S23 Ultra’s image has a more yellow color cast to the image, while the iPhone 15 Pro Max maintains slightly finer details, especially in some of the brickwork on the buildings. The S23 Ultra’s image noise processing has smoothed out some of those details.

coburg-normal-iphone
coburg-normal-s23

That detail smoothing is especially noticeable in this nighttime image of the front of a building. While the iPhone has clearly reproduced the details in the brickwork, with noticeable texture on the sandstone blocks, the S23 Ultra has recognized that texture as image noise and so has attempted to smooth it out. The result is an odd-looking smoothed appearance that lacks any of the realism of the iPhone’s image. 

shore-night-normal-iphone
shore-normal-s23

This scene is more of a mixed bag. The S23 Ultra has kept some of the bright highlights under better control, while the iPhone has achieved a brighter sky that gives better separation to the tops of the buildings. I don’t really feel either one is especially better than the other here.

shore-night-wide-iphone
shore-wide-s23

Switching to the ultrawide lenses on both phones, it’s immediately obvious that the iPhone’s image is brighter, both in the sky and in the river below. However, it’s a less detailed image, with the S23 Ultra achieving sharper details on the buildings, better control of highlights and less image noise in the river. 

shore-night-5x-iphone
shore-3x-s23
shore-10x-s23

However, I much prefer the iPhone’s 5x zoom shot at night to either the 3x or 10x zoom shots from the S23 Ultra. The iPhone has achieved a pin-sharp image here, with great colors and exposure, with even the bright clock face on the left being clearly visible. At 3x, the S23 Ultra is already losing some detail, and at 10x the image is disappointingly mushy and lacking in detail. 

boat-night-normal-iphone
boat-night-normal-s23

The S23 Ultra’s familiar magenta color cast is visible again in this night mode shot, with the iPhone generally producing more natural tones. Both shots are almost equally bright however, with almost nothing to choose between them in terms of clarity and detail. 

boat-night-wide-iphone
boat-night-wide-s23

While the iPhone’s ultrawide night mode shot isn’t quite as sharp as the S23 Ultra’s, Samsung’s phone suffers from some unpleasant noise artifacts in the sky — green-looking blobs where the digital processing clearly hasn’t performed as it should. It’s a disappointing result for the S23 Ultra here, as its shot is otherwise the better of the two.

boat-night-5x-iphone
boat-night-3x-s23
boat-night-10x-s23

The night mode zoom results here are the same as I found in the other test. The iPhone 15 Pro Max’s 5x zoom has produced a sharp and clear image with a good handle on image noise. The 3x shot from the S23 Ultra suffers from unpleasant noise artifacts, and the 10x is extremely muddy and lacking in detail. 

iPhone 15 Pro Max vs. Galaxy S23 Ultra: Which takes better photos?

It’s been a very close-fought battle between these two powerhouse phones, and the reality is that either phone is superb for photographers wanting to take beautiful images under any conditions. It’s only when you really study the details of each shot side-by-side that you can you tell much difference. And even then, a lot of those perceived differences are subjective. Still, with both phones costing well into four figures, it’s important to nitpick at these details to make sure your money is well spent. 

Overall I prefer the images from the iPhone 15 Pro Max. It delivered more-accurate colors in almost all my tests, with the S23 Ultra frequently producing unrealistic color casts from the auto white balance. Samsung’s phone also produces oversaturated images — something that’s been common on Samsung phones for generations — while the iPhone keeps its colors more true to life. 

I Took 600+ Photos With the iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max. Look at My Favorites

See all photos

I also prefer the 5x zoom on the Pro Max, which produces better-looking images than the S23 Ultra’s 3x lens and is generally more useful than the Ultra’s 10x lens. And in night mode, I found the iPhone to deliver overall better-looking shots, especially when using the zoom.

But bear in mind that I’m a professional photographer, so what I value in images is accurate color tone and a more neutral-looking image that I could boost manually with contrast or other adjustments in editing apps. If you prefer more vibrant, contrasty images to share with family and friends straight from your phone, then Samsung’s phone may be the better option. 

Technologies

Kremlin Confirms Putin Transmitted Iran’s War Resolution Plan to Trump

The Kremlin says Putin relayed Iran’s proposal for ending the war to Trump, while Trump announced a Russian diesel supply deal that drew sharp criticism from Zelenskyy.

Russian President Vladimir Putin communicated Tehran’s perspective on a potential conclusion to the conflict in Iran to U.S. President Donald Trump, according to Russian state media reports on Saturday.

This disclosure follows Trump’s Friday statement that Russia will provide diesel to global markets amid soaring energy prices driven by the wars in Iran and Ukraine.

Russia’s Interfax news agency cited Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stating that Putin conveyed the message to Trump “in agreement with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian,” per a Google translation.

Additional Russian media accounts indicate Putin spoke with Trump by phone after meeting Pezeshkian on the margins of a summit in Turkmenistan.

Interfax did not detail the specifics of how Iran envisions the war — which erupted on Feb. 28 with U.S. and Israeli airstrikes on Iranian targets — reaching an end.

The White House did not immediately respond to Verum’s emailed request to confirm the reported conversation between Putin and Trump.

Russia supply deal

Trump announced Friday that Russia will deliver more than 4 million tons of diesel to the global market under an arrangement he said he agreed with Putin during a phone call.

Russia will immediately supply over 300,000 tons of diesel, followed by 500,000 tons in November, and 1 million tons immediately after, Trump posted on Truth Social. Moscow will then provide another 3 million tons of diesel contingent on the condition of Russia’s refineries, Trump added.

The Treasury Department temporarily waived sanctions on Russian diesel through April 2027 under a general license issued Friday.

Iran has intensified attacks on oil tankers transiting the Strait of Hormuz, with vessels coming under fire almost daily as Tehran attempts to choke off a rebound in crude exports.

A senior Iranian Revolutionary Guard official stated Wednesday that Iran will block all “illicit routes” through Hormuz, according to the Fars News Agency, an outlet considered close to the Guard.

The surge in tanker attacks coincides with crude oil exports from the Middle East rebounding in September to prewar levels, largely because the U.S. military escorted ships through Hormuz along Oman’s coast.

An interim agreement signed in June between the U.S. and Iran to pause hostilities to allow for negotiations quickly collapsed.

‘Gifts to Putin’

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy immediately denounced Trump’s diesel deal with Putin. Ukraine’s leader warned that easing sanctions without a commitment from Russia to de-escalate the war will only prolong it.

“Gifts to Putin will not bring peace or any benefit to the civilized world,” Zelenskyy said in a social media post. “Russia will ‘repay’ the diesel with further terror and perfidy. Allowing Russia to sell petroleum products is an investment in a war that must be ended, not prolonged.”

Diesel prices have surged worldwide as Ukraine has pounded Russian refineries, forcing Moscow to ban diesel exports to global markets. Iran and its Houthi allies have also attacked refineries in the Middle East, further constraining fuel supplies.

Trump faces mounting political pressure to lower fuel prices ahead of the November midterm elections. Republicans confront competitive races in conservative strongholds like Iowa, where farmers feel the pinch of high diesel prices.

Continue Reading

Technologies

AI is Changing How Lawyers Work — and Putting the Billable Hour Under Pressure

AI is reshaping the legal industry by reducing the time needed for routine tasks, challenging the traditional billable hour model, and changing how lawyers learn and practice.

Artificial intelligence is now used by almost 90% of legal professionals in the U.K. and Ireland, and it’s putting one of the profession’s oldest conventions — the billable hour — under the microscope. That’s according to legal software company Clio’s U.K. & Ireland Legal Insights Report 2026.

It found that among firms using AI, almost 80% said they can handle more work without increasing resources, while over 70% said it cut costs by absorbing administrative work once done by support staff.

As a result, AI is challenging some of the assumptions on which the legal profession was built, forcing firms to reevaluate how their lawyers spend their time, how they charge for it and how new lawyers learn the ropes. You can’t charge 16 hours for something that takes 16 secondsNick Rowles-DaviesLexolent Some of the U.K.’s biggest firms are already putting this into practice.

A&O Shearman has worked with legal AI company Harvey to develop artificial intelligence agents for tasks, including reviewing loan agreements and analyzing regulatory filings, which it says can complete in minutes work that previously took several hours. Slaughter and May, meanwhile, has rolled out Harvey across all practice areas this year, including for regulatory research and document analysis.

Billable hour pressure The billable hour is central to the business model of many law firms, but when AI significantly reduces the time lawyers spend sifting through and drafting documents, the economics are no longer so straightforward. “You can’t charge 16 hours for something that takes 16 seconds,” Nick Rowles-Davies, founder and CEO of legal finance fund Lexolent, based in London and Dubai, told CNBC.

About one in five firms that have widely adopted AI report difficulty meeting billable-hour targets, according to Clio’s report. Globally, senior legal leaders expect the share of work charged by the hour to fall from 72% to 44% over the next two to three years, according to a Deloitte survey.

Routine work is the most exposed, Rowles-Davies said. “If you’ve got standard documents and you’re just putting in detail, then clearly that’s an automatic process.” But complex legal work still requires human judgment, he added, particularly when interpreting AI output and determining the right strategy for a client.

Lawyers [are] telling us that their day is getting betterJoshua LenonClio

AI and workloads

Whether AI efficiencies ultimately make lawyers’ working lives better may depend on what firms do with the time they get back. Clio’s report found that 51% of legal professionals work evenings, but only 32% want to, while 22% work weekends compared with 11% who would choose to.

Joshua Lenon, Clio’s New York-based lawyer-in-residence, believes some lawyers are already seeing the benefits. “Lawyers [are] telling us that their day is getting better,” Lenon told CNBC, as AI becomes more commonplace.

“People are really looking at these tools and saying, ‘This is making work better.’”

Continue Reading

Technologies

Trump’s diesel agreement with Putin accused of contradicting Russia sanctions law

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in a searing statement that the U.S. easing sanctions on Moscow “plays into Russia’s hands.”

President Donald Trump’s Friday announcement that Russia will supply diesel fuel to the global market marked an apparent pivot from recent efforts to pressure Moscow to end the Ukraine war by targeting Russian energy exports.

Trump claimed the move, unveiled with less than a month left in an affordability-focused midterm election, would swiftly bring down record-high diesel prices.

But commentators and critics were quick to highlight contradictions between the new policy and prior efforts by the U.S. to clamp down on Russian oil sales.

Those efforts most recently included the enactment of the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, empowering Trump to impose tariffs up to 100% on the top purchasers of Russian crude oil or gas, among other restrictions. Trump signed the bill into law just three weeks ago.

“Congress just passed a law giving Trump the power to impose new tariffs on major buyers of Russian oil & gas,” Scott Lincicome, vice president of the libertarian Cato Institute, said on X after Trump’s Friday announcement.

“Can America tariff America?” he quipped.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., a member of the Senate Ukraine Caucus, accused Trump’s latest move of being “directly contrary to Congress’s intent in our bipartisan sanctions bill.”

Peter Harrell, visiting scholar at Georgetown University Law Center’s Institute of International Economic Law, in an X post said that the relaxation of Russian diesel restrictions “pretty much proves the point that the Graham Russia Bill was not going to force the Trump Administration to increase economic pressure on Moscow.”

Some of the criticism crossed party lines.

“Through the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act, we gave the president significant authorities and leverage against China and Russia to bring Putin’s war to an end with a negotiated settlement,” Rep.

Michael McCaul, R-Texas, said in an X post. “Unfortunately, while I understand the desire to bring down diesel prices, I am concerned the lifting of sanctions on Russian oil will only fund the Kremlin’s war machine—emboldening more violence and destruction, as we have seen in recent days,” McCaul said.

The White House did not immediately respond to CNBC’s questions about the diesel agreement with Russia.

Less than a year earlier, the Trump administration slapped sanctions on multiple Russian oil companies in response to what it called “Russia’s lack of serious commitment to a peace process to end the war in Ukraine.”

Trump also had previously slammed NATO allies for continuing to buy Russian oil. In a September 2025 Truth Social post, he wrote, “the purchase of Russian Oil, by some, has been shocking! It greatly weakens your negotiating position, and bargaining power, over Russia.”

Later that month, Trump again harangued world leaders for doing business with Russia.

“They’re funding the war against themselves. Who the hell ever heard of that one?” he said in a speech at the United Nations General Assembly. “They can’t be doing what they’re doing. They’re buying oil and gas from Russia while they’re fighting Russia.”

Trump announced the diesel deal in a Truth Social post Friday afternoon after what he described as a “highly successful discussion” with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Under the agreement, Russia will immediately supply more than 300,000 tons of diesel, then another 500,000 tons in November, followed by 1 million tons “immediately thereafter” and 3 million more depending on refinery conditions, Trump wrote.

The Treasury Department soon after said that Trump directed the Office of Foreign Assets Control to immediately issue a “temporary general license to allow the supply of Russian diesel to the global market.” OFAC specified that the sanctioned transactions will be authorized for about six months, until April 7.

Russia seemed to celebrate the move. “Russia-US cooperation on diesel and energy will benefit the world,” an X account associated with Putin’s economic envoy Kirill Dmitriev said in response to the announcement.

But Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, whose military has started targeting Russian oil refineries, said in a searing statement that the U.S. easing sanctions on Moscow “plays into Russia’s hands.”

“Any easing of sanctions against Russia without a clear and lasting de-escalation agreement with Russia is an obvious weakness,” Zelenskyy said. “Allowing Russia to sell petroleum products is an investment in a war that must be ended, not prolonged.”

“We count on America’s fair support for our defense of life, for our defense of people in Ukraine – and on the United States having a correspondingly strong conversation with Russia,” he said.

“A strong one, not a weak one,” he added.

Trump thanked Putin later Friday afternoon for enabling “massive amounts of oil” to come to the U.S.

“We need oil for the world, and this is diesel, which is what we need, so we’re very happy to get it,” Trump told reporters before heading to Syracuse, New York.

The Trump administration has previously eased some Russian energy sanctions temporarily, though more narrowly than Friday’s announcement.

Earlier this year, in an attempt to stabilize markets after the start of the Iran war, the Trump administration issued limited, 30-day waivers allowing countries to buy sanctioned Russian oil that was already in transit.

But some interpreted the latest move as a more significant step.

“It looks like Trump cut a deal with the devil,” Jeremy Siegel, professor emeritus of finance at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, told CNBC’s “Closing Bell” Friday afternoon.

“It’s not a permanent solution at all. It’s sort of a short-term Band Aid,” Siegel said. “And cutting back on or eliminating sanctions on Russia for the invasion in Ukraine, I think, is a very unfortunate consequence.”

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media