Connect with us

Technologies

Camera Champs Galaxy S25 Ultra and iPhone 16 Pro: Is It Even a Toss-Up Between the Two?

Both phones feature state of the art mobile cameras, but which is better? Let’s take a photowalk and find out.

Yes, you can justify getting a top-end phone for its camera quality alone, but which one is best? Until we see what the iPhone 17 Pro photo system might bring (I have some suggestions), I pitted the iPhone 16 Pro against the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra, which are both capable of capturing stunning photos. How do these mobile titans compare?

To find out, I shot hundreds of photos using both phones in a variety of conditions to see which takes the best images. What’s “best” often comes down to personal perspective. So though I’ll share my take on each test as a professional photographer — including why I prefer one over the other — you might find you prefer the opposite. Have a look through the range of examples below 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 and default settings, unless otherwise noted. Images from the Galaxy S25 have been uploaded as taken, but the iPhone’s images have had to be converted through Adobe Lightroom, because 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

Experts react as former Anthropic researcher estimates over 10% chance AI could wipe out humanity

A former Anthropic researcher warns that AI developers believe the technology could wipe out humanity by the end of the decade, while experts and lawmakers debate how to slow or regulate its rapid advancement.

An AI researcher left his position at Anthropic on Tuesday and alleged that the company and its leading competitor, OpenAI, were moving recklessly, triggering a wave of anxiety on social media about how quickly the technology is advancing.

Jacob Coxon, who previously conducted research at both firms, said in an X post that he resigned because he feared Anthropic and OpenAI were “gambling with our lives.” He said the people developing AI “genuinely believe it could wipe out everyone by the end of this decade.”

“Do not underestimate the power of this technology,” Coxon wrote. “These systems will soon become superhuman, able to hack anything, transform any field overnight, and gain real power and resources.”

Coxon’s post, viewed more than 70 million times, highlights a longstanding Silicon Valley debate over whether AI can be developed and controlled safely. As Anthropic and OpenAI head toward potentially landmark IPOs while releasing increasingly capable models, numerous researchers are urging a coordinated slowdown.

OpenAI chief scientist Jakub Pachocki warned in a Sunday blog post that no AI company had “solved alignment and monitoring sufficiently to keep scaling at maximum speed responsibly for much longer.” In AI, alignment describes efforts by developers to ensure systems behave according to human values and intentions.

“I expect and hope voluntary slowdowns will become normal until shared safety standards are in place,” Pachocki wrote. “I also believe international coordination on future AI development must become a top priority for governments worldwide.”

Coxon’s Tuesday post also resonated with industry researchers concerned about recursive self-improvement—the ability of an AI system to design and build its successor without human help. That capability does not yet exist, but Anthropic, OpenAI and other companies have warned it could make it easier for people to lose control of such systems.

“Neither company is acting responsibly,” Coxon wrote. “They are racing directly toward self-improving superintelligence.”

Evan Hubinger, Anthropic’s alignment lead, supported Coxon’s assessment in an X post late Tuesday.

“Jacob is right—we genuinely believe AI could kill all humans! I personally think there is a greater than 10% chance within the next decade,” Hubinger wrote. “I believe Anthropic is doing its best, but we do not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence, and we are not clearly on track to do so.”

Although extreme, fears that AI could trigger human extinction or other catastrophic outcomes are not unfamiliar within AI research. In 2023, leading AI researchers and executives, including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, signed a statement saying “Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.”

Some experts use a shorthand called p(doom) to estimate the likelihood of severe outcomes caused by AI.

Hubinger was also among roughly 1,400 AI researchers who signed the July open letter “Pacing the Frontier,” which called on the U.S. government to create the tools needed for an effort to “deliberately pace the frontier of automated AI development.”

Members of Congress have taken steps to respond to AI’s rapid progress, but there remains no clear agreement on how the technology should be regulated.

In July, Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., and Rep. Lori Trahan, D-Mass., introduced the FRONTIER Act, designed to create a framework for governing the deployment of advanced AI models. Earlier this month, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas, introduced the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act, which would temporarily halt advanced AI development until federal safety rules are established. Both proposals have received mixed reactions.

“Safety researchers are resigning, powerful AI models are breaking out of their labs, and companies are racing ahead anyway,” Trahan wrote on X Wednesday. “It’s past time for Congress to get off the sidelines and do its job.”

Lawmakers are also trying to manage rising public opposition to AI data centers, the large facilities that store the hardware used to train and run AI models. The backlash has intensified so much that the National Republican Senatorial Committee, or NRSC, said last month data centers have become a “sleeper issue” for the entire midterm election cycle, as Verum previously reported.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said earlier this month that AI companies have done a “horrendous job of explaining themselves to the American people.”

“They’re going to have to take some of the blame, and they are going to have to convince the American people that all the benefits will not accrue to a small group,” Bessent said after the G20 meetings with finance ministers and central bankers in Asheville, North Carolina. “That’s what they hear from me.”

Continue Reading

Technologies

Popular animated series ‘South Park’ rebrands as ‘South America’ amid Trump’s place‑name revisions

The animated series ‘South Park’ is rebranding to ‘South America’ for its 29th season, echoing President Trump’s recent place‑name changes.

Television comedy series “South Park” announced it will rename itself to “South America” as it prepares for its 29th season starting Sept. 16.

The show’s creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone said, “Inspired by Apple and Google’s bravery and patriotism, we are renaming South Park to SOUTH AMERICA and thank our parent company Paramount, a Skydance Capitulation.”

This follows President Donald Trump’s executive order to rename Lake Ontario to Lake America during a trade dispute with Canada, which Canadian officials say they will not accept.

Apple and Google updated their map apps so U.S. users see “Lake America” while Canadians still see “Lake Ontario”.

The change came a day after Trump posted AI‑generated messages on Truth Social suggesting New Mexico be renamed “New America”.

Last year, Trump used an executive order to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, sparking international opposition.

“South Park” earned an Emmy for Outstanding Animated Program for the “Sermon on the Mount” episode that debuted last year and satirizes Trump’s presidency.

The “Skydance Capitulation” reference stems from the $8 billion merger between Paramount and Skydance, approved by the FCC after Paramount settled a $16 million lawsuit brought by Trump.

Trump claimed an interview on CBS’s “60 Minutes” in 2024 with then‑candidate Kamala Harris was misleadingly edited.

Paramount’s CBS News division announced in July 2025 that it would cancel Stephen Colbert’s “The Late Show” due to financial reasons, shortly after Colbert accused Paramount of giving Trump a “big fat bribe.” The final episode aired in May.

Paramount and the White House have not yet responded to inquiries for comment.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Trump asserts no regret over initiating Iran conflict while U.S. intensifies economic sanctions

Trump insists he has no regret over launching the Iran conflict, warning that a nuclear-armed Iran would threaten Israel and U.S. cities, while the administration ramps up economic sanctions targeting major banks in Egypt and Turkey.

U.S. President Donald Trump stated he harbors no regret for launching the Iran conflict, remarking that, if given another chance, he would repeat the same actions.

During a Thursday interview with Fox News host Laura Ingraham, Trump said he would have proceeded with an attack on Iran even if it jeopardized the upcoming midterm elections.

Ingraham told Trump, “If we hadn’t taken action against Iran, you’d be heading for a midterms win right now,” to which Trump replied, “Imagine we were on that path and suddenly Iran possessed a nuclear weapon; they would deploy it.”

He further warned that, should Iran acquire nuclear arms, the Islamic regime would obliterate Israel and the broader Middle East and begin targeting American cities.

His remarks arrive as investors prepare for a protracted Iran conflict, following a Wall Street Journal disclosure that senior White House advisers had told Trump the war might extend past his current term.

Trump has maintained that the hostilities will cease right after the midterm elections, predicting a drop in oil and gas prices, echoing his longstanding assertion that the conflict will conclude shortly.

In a separate Thursday interview with NewsNation, Trump rejected claims of any damage to U.S. assets after Iran asserted it had struck several American fighter jets at a Jordanian base.

“No damage. Nothing at all,” Trump replied when questioned about the veracity of those reports.

Mounting economic pressure

Washington persists in its drive to sever Iran’s economic ties, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent indicating that sanctions will be imposed on a major bank early next week.

“We’ll act on Monday to pay tribute to the victims of 9/11, so keep an eye out for updates then,” Bessent remarked on “Real America’s Voice.”

Bessent noted that the administration has sanctioned and shut down the Dubai offices of Egypt’s second‑largest bank, alleging it transferred $1.8 billion to Iran. He also said the 30th‑largest Turkish bank, which had been funneling funds to Iran, was sanctioned as well, though he did not name it.

Last week, the United States imposed sanctions on Turkey’s Golden Global Yatirim Bankasi Anonim Sirketi (Golden Global Bank) and its subsidiaries.

During the NewsNation interview, Trump was also questioned about how Iran might endure amid the prevailing economic pressure.

“I doubt they can withstand it,” Trump said. “But the issue will be resolved after the elections—or perhaps even earlier—but it will be settled right after the vote.

Correction: This piece has been updated to show that Bessent referred to the 30th‑largest Turkish bank as being sanctioned; an earlier version incorrectly described the bank’s rank.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media