Connect with us

Technologies

Camera Champions Face Off: iPhone 16 Pro vs. Galaxy S25 Ultra

When photo quality is a top consideration, the best phones from Apple and Samsung are amazing. But which is better? It’s time to find out.

When you’re looking for the best camera to carry in your pocket, you need to consider today’s top-tier phones. The imaging capabilities of the iPhone 16 Pro and Galaxy S25 Ultra are among the best money can buy. And with travel season ramping up, carrying a phone may be the most convenient camera. But for photo details how do these two mobile titans compare?

To find out, I shot hundreds of photos using both phones in a variety of conditions to see which phone takes the best-looking images. What’s “best” is often down to personal perspective so while I’ll be giving my personal take on each test as a professional photographer and giving my reasons why I prefer one over the other, you may well find that you prefer the other. So have a look through the range of examples here and see if you come to a different conclusion. 

Read more: Best Camera Phone of 2025

All images shown have been taken using each phone’s default camera mode using default settings, unless otherwise stated. While images from the Galaxy S25 have been uploaded as taken, the iPhone’s images have had to be converted through Adobe Lightroom as our publishing platform doesn’t support Apple’s default HEIF image format. This process doesn’t affect the image in any way. 

Ready? Let’s dive in.

Starting out with an easy outdoor scene. Both phones have done a great job capturing an even exposure here and both images are packed with detail. It’s difficult to choose between them, but the iPhone has the edge for me as it’s achieved a slightly warmer image with more natural-looking tones. The S25 Ultra’s image looks too saturated, especially in the blue sky, which I find quite distracting. 

It’s much the same story when we switch to the ultrawide lenses on both phones. I prefer the warmer tones in the iPhone’s shot, which makes the S25 Ultra’s look quite cold by comparison. I also prefer the lighter shadows on the iPhone’s image, making it an easy win for the iPhone here. Notably, both phones are doing a good job of compensating for the ultrawide lenses at the edges (a function turned on by default on both phones); the railing remains straight in each shot and not curving as you’d typically see using a lens this wide. 

There’s almost no difference between these two outdoor scenes. The blossom looks crisp on both images, with excellent overall exposure. The iPhone’s image is again slightly warmer in tone but it’s negligible.

The Galaxy S25 takes an easy win with this image of bluebells. The colors are much more vibrant, especially in the greens on the blades of grass, which look quite washed out on the iPhone’s image. It actually looks like the S25’s camera lens is slightly polarized to reduce reflections and increase saturation, but I don’t know if that’s the case. Either way, Samsung takes the win here.

At 5x zoom things get worse for the iPhone. Despite the bluebells being reasonably far away, the phone seemed unable to achieve a sharp focus on the flowers. The S25 Ultra, meanwhile, managed to achieve a sharp image with richer colors. 

I prefer the iPhone’s image here though. It’s brighter and the warmer colors on the bricks on the surrounding buildings look much more true to life. 

The iPhone’s image is again brighter here and I prefer its colors too. The Galaxy S25 Ultra does have the edge in fine detail, though. You really need to zoom in to see it but the tiny lines on the building are slightly sharper on the S25. 

The S25 Ultra does have a physical advantage over the iPhone with its 10x optical zoom lens, which allows it to zoom in even further while still maintaining a pin-sharp image. 

You can still digitally zoom in with the iPhone to 10x, and the results aren’t bad. I prefer the colors of the S25 Ultra’s shot here, but the difference in detail isn’t that noticeable.

Zooming in close to see the fine details, the S25 Ultra’s optical zoom image definitely has a bit more clarity but the digital upscaling on the iPhone’s shot has done a great job here, as the difference isn’t immense.

iPhone 16 Pro vs. Galaxy S25 Ultra: Night modes compared

At first glance, the only real difference between the iPhone’s 5x shot and the S25 Ultra’s 5x shot is the color balance. And honestly, I don’t have a preference between the warmer tone of the iPhone or the more magenta bias of the S25. 

However, when you zoom in close to the details, the iPhone has produced a sharper image here, with an odd sort of digital blurring around the lamp post in the S25 Ultra’s image. So sometimes the S25 Ultra’s zoom is sharper, other times it’s the iPhone’s. I’m glad they’re making this easy for me. 

Again, the only real difference here is in the color balance and I don’t really know which I prefer. The exposure, noise levels and amount of detail are practically identical. 

Things changed when I switched to the ultrawide lenses, though. The S25 Ultra’s shot is definitely brighter, capturing more detail in the cobblestones in the foreground and in the buildings in the distance. The iPhone’s image is much darker overall. 

Just to confuse things further, the iPhone’s nighttime image with its ultrawide lens is noticeably brighter than the S25 Ultra’s in this example that I shot in the Arctic. I actually had to double-check the image metadata to make sure I hadn’t mixed these up, but I haven’t. The iPhone’s image has captured more light information here and produced more detail on the ice door to the right. 

The iPhone’s nighttime image is again slightly brighter here but it’s also kept the bright highlights on the pub sign under control. On the S25 Ultra’s image, those highlights are almost lost to pure white but the lovely green and yellow tones have been retained in the iPhone’s image. The colors overall are noticeably warmer on the iPhone’s shot, however, which may not be to your taste. Here, I think they work well.

But in this example, the iPhone has produced a weirdly warm-looking image that I really don’t like. Those warm colors were not present at the time of capture and it doesn’t work for the scene, especially not with such strong orange tones in the sky. The S25 Ultra’s image is much more balanced overall and it’s a slightly sharper image too. It’s a very easy win for Samsung here.

Things don’t improve for the iPhone when using the ultra-wide lens. Its image is again plagued by overly warm tones, while the S25 Ultra’s shot is both more color-accurate and brighter. 

iPhone 16 Pro vs. Galaxy S25 Ultra: Which takes better selfies?

While the Galaxy S25 Ultra’s selfie is slightly brighter, I don’t like what it’s done with the colors. My face has been made a weird shade of orange and my denim jacket is a much deeper blue than it really is. The skin tones on the iPhone’s shot are much more accurate, and its shot is sharper as well.

Both phones have a wider-angle mode for the selfie camera, although the iPhone’s seems to be a lot wider. That’s definitely worth keeping in mind if you frequently like to cram lots of friends into your group pics. You could probably squeeze at least one or two extra friends in if you used the iPhone, or have to decide who you like least and leave them out of frame if you used the S25 Ultra. Otherwise, the image differences are the same as before. 

iPhone 16 Pro Vs Galaxy S25 Ultra: Which camera is better?

I’ve written many of these comparison pieces on various generations of phones in my 14 years at CNET and I don’t remember having done one that’s felt this close. The problem is that neither phone excels consistently in one area; the iPhone 16 Pro’s ultra-wide shots aren’t as bright as the S25 Ultra’s, except on those occasions when they actually are, confusingly. I’ve taken many more images not included here that both support some of my conclusions and argue against them. Go figure.

But there are some takeaways I can give with confidence. Generally speaking, the iPhone’s colors are more natural than the S25 Ultra’s, which can sometimes look overly saturated. This has been the case with almost every Samsung phone since the company started putting cameras in them and it’s still the case today. Those looking for a more natural base image to apply your own filters and effects over will be better suited with the iPhone 16 Pro.

But that’s less the case at night, when the iPhone more consistently delivers warmer tones that look less natural than the S25 Ultra’s. So, if night photography is important to you, the S25 Ultra may be the better option. Overall, its night mode images from all lenses were brighter and sharper.

Sure, the S25 Ultra has the extended zoom range but you’d really need to know you’ll make the most of a 10x zoom to justify picking one over the other. Personally, I find the 5x zoom level a perfect sweet spot and here the phones are pretty much on par. And on those rare occasions you may want to push things further, the iPhone’s digital zoom can still deliver sharp results. 

There are other things for photographers to consider too: Apple’s ProRaw is superb and while the company’s Photographic Styles can be good for adding a creative look to your images, Samsung’s new tool for mimicking the color grade from example photos you feed it works surprisingly well — I actually think I might get more use out of that overall. I haven’t even gone into video quality either, which is a whole other article, especially when you consider both phones shoot Log video, although only the iPhone uses ProRes. 

Deciding between the phones based solely on the cameras is nigh on impossible. Which one you should get will instead come down to the bigger question of iOS versus Android; which platform you’re already using and which one will work best with other pieces of tech in your life. But for simple picture quality, you may as well toss a coin.

Technologies

Amodei’s AI Slowdown Could Reshape Anthropic’s Planned 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 path to an IPO just became significantly more complex.

While the company behind Claude is meeting with potential investors ahead of its potentially landmark debut, co-founder and CEO Dario Amodei is advocating for a strategy that appears to contradict these ambitious plans: slowing down.

Anthropic, which was valued at $965 billion earlier this year, has confidentially filed its IPO prospectus and is widely expected to list its shares as soon as next month. At the same time, concerns about the power of advanced AI models have been growing, spilling into the mainstream as more researchers warn of potential threats of human extinction.

In this context, 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.”

This is 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. Although Anthropic may have to accept a hit to revenue growth, some experts say an intentional slowdown could help Anthropic position itself as a responsible actor, avoid future liability and address the public backlash towards AI that’s been building 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.”

Continue Reading

Technologies

Iran Claims It Shot Down U.S. Advanced Drone Above Strait of Hormuz Amid Escalating Middle East Tensions

Iran says it shot down an advanced U.S. MQ‑1 drone over the Strait of Hormuz as tensions rise. The claim comes amid stalled diplomacy, renewed threats over oil control, and rising crude prices.

Iranian military announced it has destroyed an advanced American drone over the Strait of Hormuz, marking the latest exchange as Tehran and Washington trade warnings and strikes with no sign of de‑escalation. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said on Monday that its “new advanced aerospace defence system” intercepted and destroyed an advanced MQ‑1 drone in the Hormuz strait, without providing further details on the drone’s mission. The MQ‑1 is built by American defense contractor General Atomics and has historically been operated mainly by the U.S. Air Force and the CIA.

The incident follows a series of Iranian operations against U.S. unmanned naval systems in the Gulf, as the conflict, now in its seventh month, shows few signs of abating and diplomatic efforts over the strategic waterway remain stalled. On Sunday, President Donald Trump said the United States could continue its campaign against Iran and seize control of its oil, comparing the situation to the deal Washington reached with Venezuela earlier this year.

“We’ll ultimately get out (of the war), unless we decide to stay and keep the oil like Venezuela,” Trump said of the Iran conflict at the Irish Open golf championship in Ireland. He added that U.S. revenue from the Venezuela arrangement, which gave Washington access to roughly a fifth of Venezuela’s oil reserves, has “paid for the war many times.”

Under the August agreement, Venezuela ceded majority U.S. control of more than 65 billion barrels of oil reserves — more than double America’s own reserves — in exchange for $209 billion for Venezuela’s state treasury. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the deal would also bring close to $100 billion in private investment to reinvigorate the Venezuelan economy.

On Sunday, Trump said he expects the seven‑month Iran war to end this year, possibly after the November midterm elections, and insisted that gasoline prices would “drop like a rock” once it does. He said he would only make the “right deal,” adding that Tehran has been “calling constantly” for peace talks, a claim Iran has previously dismissed.

Stalled Hormuz talks

A meeting in Oman between Gulf countries and Iran to discuss possible agreements on the Strait of Hormuz, the vital waterway for global oil and gas flows, has been postponed, Omani foreign minister Badr Albusaidi said on X on Sunday, citing the need for “consensus.” Officials from Iran and Gulf nations had been expected to meet on Monday and sign an agreement establishing an Iran‑Oman shipping route through the Strait of Hormuz, though no direct talks between the U.S. and Iran were ongoing.

The Strait of Hormuz has been subjected to an Iranian and later U.S. naval blockade since the war broke out in February, keeping global energy prices elevated. A June accord between Washington and Tehran faltered over disagreements about the artery, and a recent offensive by Yemen’s Houthi rebels has given the Tehran‑aligned group leverage over a second critical waterway, the Bab el‑Mandeb.

Ships deemed non‑compliant are regularly targeted by Iranian strikes, while the U.S. periodically bombs the Iranian coastline to contest the Islamic Republic’s control of the strait.

Oil prices rose past $100 a barrel again for the first time since May and climbed further on Monday after Saudi Arabia shut a key East‑West energy pipeline following damage from Iraqi drones. U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures were up 2.3% to $102.39 per barrel. Brent crude, the international benchmark, traded 2.4% higher to $107.11 a barrel.

Continue Reading

Technologies

OpenAI boss Sam Altman spells out how and why the AI industry wants to slow down: ‘We could lose control’

OpenAI’s chief has made comments detailing how AI safety frameworks and a slowdown could work, as the industry unites behind concerns.

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