Technologies
iPhone 16E vs. Pixel 9A: I Tested the Cameras and Was Surprised by the Results
Here’s how Apple and Google’s most affordable phones compare against each other in terms of photography.
Most phones these days take decent photos for posting to Instagram or sharing with friends and family on a message thread. But the best cameras are found on smartphones that typically cost $1,000 or more. Fortunately, 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.
But something curious happened this year. 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 a grand. And while $599 is the lowest price that Apple sells a new phone for, the iPhone 16E misses that $500 sweet spot of the Pixel 9A.
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 | Apeture | 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
I Tried an Air Purifier Designed to Filter Out Weed and Cigarette Smoke
Just because you celebrate 420 doesn’t mean you want the smell of smoke. A new specialty filter from GermGuardian helps keep things fresh.
In the US and globally, April 20 has become an unofficial holiday for weed smokers. While vaping, gummies and edibles are increasingly popular, a fair number of people still light up for a smoke, and that can result in a lingering odor many find unpleasant.
I’m one of those people, and GermGuardian’s new FLT420B air purifier filter is designed to remove cannabis smoke more effectively than standard air purifier filters.
«As cannabis use becomes more widely accepted, we recognized a real gap in the market for a filter purpose-built to tackle cannabis smoke odors, not just mask them,» said Rukky Ojakovo, senior director of heaters and air quality at Guardian Technologies. «In our two-week in-home test, over 90% of users rated it very effective at reducing cannabis odor.»
I’ve been using the FLT420B filter in my home with a GermGuardian AC4880B air purifier for several weeks now, and I’ve been impressed with just how effectively it tackles smoke odors. In my case, the odor is more from cigarette smoke than marijuana (I had the misfortune of indoor smokers moving into the unit below me). The FLT420B filter has been effective at tackling the smell.
«While the FLT420B was engineered specifically for cannabis smoke, its advanced odor-control media targets VOCs [volatile organic compounds] broadly, making it effective against other herbal smoke as well,» Ojakovo told me over email.
According to GermGuardian, the filter is 300 times more effective than standard HEPA smoke filters and targets odor-causing VOCs at the «molecular» level. The company says it can remove cannabis odor within 90 minutes. Though I’m not a marijuana smoker myself — I’m very sensitive to bad odors, and I have two asthmatic cats — I’m planning on testing this soon by using cannabis-scented incense sticks.
In the meantime, to test this, I placed the entire AC4880B air purifier unit, with the smoke filter installed, in a closet in my wife’s office and shut the door. Using the UV-C sanitizing light, which can generate a small amount of safe ozone, the entire closet was effectively deodorized in about 24 hours.
I asked Ojakovo what played the largest role in clearing the odor from the closet. The filter was the primary driver.
«The FLT420B’s advanced odor-control media is specifically designed to capture VOCs and lingering odors like cigarette smoke,» Ojakovo said. «The UV-C light is great for reducing airborne bacteria, germs, and mold spores, but is less targeted toward chemical-based smoke odors specifically.»
Interestingly, even after I pulled it out of the closet, the air inside has stayed deodorized, though sealing gaps and cracks likely helped.
To further test how well the filter cleared smells, I moved the GermGuardian unit to my galley kitchen and placed it by my trash cans. There’s not much ventilation in there, and I have a gas range, so there are plenty of VOCs. I’ve left it there for over a week now, and since then, I’ve noticed a distinct reduction in stale cooking smells and a general improvement in air quality, verified by an air quality monitor.
«Since the FLT420B is designed to tackle VOCs, it can certainly help with cooking-related odors and gases,» said Ojakovo, while also pointing out that the company sells filters designed for kitchen use specifically. «For heavier kitchen use near a gas range, we’d recommend exploring our broader lineup of filters, designed for specific use cases.»
Now, if you suffer from allergies, you may want to consider a different air purifier model, but for VOCs, it’s been one of the more effective ones I’ve used.
Price and availability
The FLT420B will work with GermGuardian’s most widely used air purifiers, including the AC4880, AC4825E, AC4300, AC4825, AC4870, AC4820, AC4900, AC4850PT, CDAP4500 and AP2200CA. If you own one of those models, it’s simply a matter of purchasing the FLT420B filter from Amazon (currently out of stock) or directly from Guardian Technologies for $40.
If you’re a new customer, you can buy the model with the features you prefer and pair it with a filter that suits your use case.
Editor’s note: While cannabis has been legalized for medical and even recreational use in some states, marijuana and products containing THC are still a Schedule I drug under US federal law. Always exercise caution and judgment when consuming cannabis or any other controlled substance.
Technologies
‘Han Solo Wants to Be Me’: Artemis II’s Victor Glover on Flying the Orion
CNET spoke with the Artemis II astronaut and pilot about seeing parts of the moon that no other human has seen before and getting to manually fly a spacecraft.
Even if you’re 250,000 miles from Earth, sleep is important. However, for all the life-sustaining accoutrements aboard the Orion spacecraft, the capsule lacked bedrooms, leaving the four-person Artemis II crew with a truly bizarre sleeping arrangement.
«I slept really close to an air conditioning vent. And so I’d wake up and I just see this big hunk of metal,» Glover told CNET during a video call. «And it was like, ‘Oh, I’m in space. I am weightless.'»
Sleep wasn’t just a means for the astronauts to recharge; it also grounded them during their historic journey. Glover explained, «What really resonated with me is we’re also humans. It’s like camping, and this is a very important part of this journey.»
Artemis II was the first crewed mission to the moon in over 50 years. It followed Artemis I, a 2022 uncrewed mission that was the first for NASA’s new Space Launch System rocket and Orion spacecraft. The goal for Artemis II was to have a crew test the spacecraft, life support systems, the SLS rocket and the procedures needed for future lunar missions that will involve landing on the moon and eventually building a base there.
Glover, the Orion’s pilot, along with commander Reid Wiseman and mission specialists Christina Koch and Jeremy Hansen, made up the Artemis II crew. The mission made a lot of history. It’s the first time a woman, a Black man or a Canadian has journeyed to the moon. The four Artemis II astronauts traveled 252,756 miles from Earth, farther than any other human being, surpassing the record set by the 1970 Apollo 13 mission.
This wasn’t Glover’s first time in space. In 2020, with a Falcon 9 rocket for liftoff, he piloted the Crew Dragon capsule to and from the International Space Station for NASA’s SpaceX Crew-1 mission, spending over 167 days in space. But Artemis II gave Glover the opportunity to be the first to fly the Orion, a new vehicle designed for Artemis missions. For the majority of the nearly 10-day journey, Orion was on autopilot. But Glover had several opportunities to take manual control of the spacecraft to test its handling.
«It was such a treat and a joy,» Glover said about flying the Orion. «It was a test pilot’s dream to fly a new spaceship for the first time by hand.»
Even after spending time training to fly in a simulator back on Earth, he was surprised by how responsive the Orion’s hand controller was and by the clarity of the cameras, used to maneuver the craft around the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage that holds the fuel for the upper stage of liftoff. He said the view from the cameras and monitors was like «looking out a window.»
When I asked Glover if he felt like Han Solo when piloting the Orion, he retorted, «Han Solo wants to be me when he grows up!» Throughout my interview, Glover was gracious, passionate and funny.
«I get to do stuff that’s cooler than Han Solo. I mean, just the fact that it’s real, it’s better.»
While landing on the moon wasn’t in the cards for this trip, the Orion crew traveled about 4,000 miles beyond the moon, allowing them to see parts of the moon that had never been seen before. For comparison, Apollo missions flew about 70 miles above the moon to make landings, limiting how much of it they could actually see.
The images that Glover and the crew took of the moon were stunning. Shots like the Earthset were a reminder of how beautiful our planet is and our place within the solar system. The astronauts even witnessed a total solar eclipse as they rounded the far side of the moon. But none of the photos they took compares to what they saw, according to Glover.
«I could see the curvature of the moon. Depth is just one aspect that you cannot see in the pictures. But here’s the other thing, the pictures lack scale.»
For the lunar flyby, the Orion was moving fast: 60,863 mph relative to Earth, but only 3,139 mph relative to the moon, according to NASA. The speed meant the shadows across the surface were constantly morphing into different shapes. Glover was particularly enamored with the moon’s terminator, where the light and dark sides of the moon meet. The terminator isn’t fixed and depends on the moon’s position relative to the sun. As Orion moved, it transformed into various shapes that looked like letters of the alphabet.
«People know, I fell in love with the terminator when I got to see the real one up close. I watched the terminator go from a letter C to a letter D, which means there was a point when the moon was half light, half dark. It was pointing right at me.»
Artemis II’s lunar flyby was a highlight of the journey for many of us on Earth, in part because we could watch it in real time on streaming services like Netflix. Nearly the entire mission was streamed live on NASA’s website and YouTube channel, making it feel like a reality show. One minute you’re watching the crew eat, work out, take photos of the moon; the next, there’s a random jar of Nutella floating by one of the cameras. I asked Glover whether it felt like he was on a TV show while on the Orion.
«It did not feel like a reality show on my end,» said Glover. «For you to see the science and hear us describing the moon, and to see us flying the spaceship by hand, and to see bedtime and bath time and teeth brush time, that’s what it’s like. The mission was all of those things.»
Glover was ecstatic to hear how I and others felt so connected to the crew during their mission. He said it was important to NASA to let the world in on everything it took to send four people a quarter of a million miles away.
«I think that maybe one of the really, most special things about this mission is how much you were able to see,» Glover said with a smile. «It makes me feel good that you felt like you were there.»
Technologies
Artemis II’s Victor Glover Chats With CNET
-
Technologies3 года agoTech Companies Need to Be Held Accountable for Security, Experts Say
-
Technologies3 года agoBest Handheld Game Console in 2023
-
Technologies3 года agoTighten Up Your VR Game With the Best Head Straps for Quest 2
-
Technologies4 года agoBlack Friday 2021: The best deals on TVs, headphones, kitchenware, and more
-
Technologies5 лет agoGoogle to require vaccinations as Silicon Valley rethinks return-to-office policies
-
Technologies5 лет agoVerum, Wickr and Threema: next generation secured messengers
-
Technologies4 года agoOlivia Harlan Dekker for Verum Messenger
-
Technologies4 года agoThe number of Сrypto Bank customers increased by 10% in five days
