Connect with us

Technologies

iPhone 17 Pro vs. Pixel 10 Pro XL: Pitting Phone Camera Royalty Against Each Other

They’re two of the best camera phones on the market, but how do they compete face to face? Let’s compare some photos and find out.

When you spend more than $1,000 on a smartphone, you expect great cameras as part of the package. It’s not enough to offer a decent point-and-shoot experience at this level.

To truly stand out, today’s smartphones have to pack pro-level camera performance into impossibly small bodies, leveraging dedicated image-processing hardware and software to make even rookie photographers look competent. 

No two rivals represent this arms race better than Apple’s iPhone 17 Pro and Google’s Pixel 10 Pro XL. These flagship models represent not just the high end of each line but also the role models for other companies to follow, particularly the Pixel 10 Pro XL, since Google makes Android. (For a look at how the iPhone compares against another leading camera phone, the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra, see CNET Editor at Large Andrew Lanxon’s photo shootout.)

I’ve been carrying both phones around Seattle and took them on a trip to the Columbia River Gorge, separating Washington and Oregon, to see how their cameras compare. Image quality has been excellent on both, but they each surprised me at times. For example, when I thought one would overcompensate in color, it would be the other that went overboard. But which one? You might also be surprised.

Read moreBest Camera Phone of 2025

All photos were captured with the default automatic settings, though some of them were captured in raw format for more editing options later; however, none of these images have been corrected. All were exported as JPEGs so CNET’s publishing system can read them (versus Apple’s HEIF format, for instance). 

Both cameras also capture in high dynamic range mode, which increases brightness in certain areas, but only on displays that support HDR viewing. What you see on this page may not match exactly what you’d see on the iPhone or Pixel screen. That’s a general issue with HDR images on the web right now, until the technology is more widely adopted.


Don’t miss any of our unbiased tech content and lab-based reviews. Add CNET as a preferred Google source.


iPhone 17 Pro vs. Pixel 10 Pro XL: Main camera

The main camera in each phone has to pull a lot of weight. It’s the one that gets the best light-gathering ability (an aperture of f/1.78 for the iPhone and f/1.68 for the Pixel) and a wide, but not ultrawide, field of view to capture most scenes.

I’ll take almost any excuse to get out in the fall leaves this time of year. This scene has it all: fallen leaves, long shadows, clear crisp weather and even a man in a red shirt to draw attention. Both photos are great representations of the moment, though the iPhone’s colors are a little more punchy without being oversaturated. Oddly, the foreground branch in the Pixel’s image is slightly out of focus, though it’s only noticeable if you zoom in. We’ll come back to this scene with the telephoto cameras later.

When testing cameras, I tend to look for spots where people are likely to take photos. I also like to find ones that might challenge a smartphone camera: dark shadows in the foreground, a bright light source in the middle and lots of little details like leaves and sailboat masts that can be tricky for any camera. 

Both cameras have done well here, too. The colors in the iPhone shot seem more natural to my eye, while the Pixel is ever so slightly muted. But really, they’re both lovely.

Did I mention challenging? Let’s fire into the sun on a foggy morning. Again, I’m happy with both photos. There’s plenty of softness around the sun as the light blends outward, and the white balance is under control in each one. If you pixel-peep, you’ll notice the Pixel 10 Pro XL is a touch sharper — look at the street lamp attached to the telephone pole at the right edge — but also more noisy in the dark areas, like the fence at left.

Not every pair of shots was similar, and this scene was a surprise. Initially, the color was way off with the iPhone: very blue and unexpectedly saturated. After some investigating, I realized the iPhone was set to capture with the Bright photographic style by default, a new feature in iOS 26. I’ve had that selected since I got the iPhone 17 Pro, and in most cases, it does create a punchy, engaging photo. But here it went overboard.

Switching to the Standard style brought the tones and colors back in line, even though they’re still too cool blue for my taste. The Pixel 10 Pro XL has done a great job rendering a more faithful version of the scene with the warm fall hues.

Looking at the sculpture from a few feet back, the iPhone is still obsessed with making everything blue. Even after setting the photographic style to Standard, the sky still looks unnaturally saturated. The Pixel 10 Pro XL, again, nails the color.

In this photo, I’m not just looking to see how the cameras rendered the subject in shade with bright sunlight in the background, but also how each phone handles its Portrait mode. That’s the soft background effect (bokeh) created in software because at the main cameras’ focal lengths, the look is difficult to achieve naturally.

I’m happy to report that both cameras have improved the modes over time — the Pixel 10 Pro XL can apply Portrait mode when shooting in the 50-megapixel high-res mode — with natural-looking bokeh and minimal artifacts around the subject. In this case, I prefer the Pixel 10 Pro XL image because of the look on her face, but the lighting and color of the iPhone 17 Pro photo is better overall (I should have kept snapping photos with the iPhone until I got a better expression).

This set of photos reveals another surprise that turned out to be consistent throughout my experience. They’re both similar, but the Pixel tends to be more restrained in tone, color and saturation. Not necessarily flat, but it’s almost as if Google is trying to atone for the over-processed sins of past smartphone cameras.

The iPhone photo is a little warmer, brighter and more contrasty; look at the cement walkway at the bottom-left corner. I’m not saying either photo is bad; it was a bright, cloudless day. But like Andrew Lanxon did in his iPhone 17 Pro/Samsung S25 Ultra shootout, I prefer more natural, less contrasty images in general. In that comparison, the iPhone was the model of restraint, but here, it’s the one providing more pop overall.

This guy gets included because that vest and those glasses just make him look cool.

iPhone 17 Pro vs. Pixel 10 Pro XL: Ultrawide camera

The ultrawide cameras in each phone remain largely unchanged from their previous models.

What’s notable about the ultrawide cameras is something you don’t see: distortion. Apple and Google have done well to automatically correct for warped edges. The top railing in both photos doesn’t bend back toward the viewer as one would expect with an extremely wide lens. In terms of color and tone, the iPhone looks better to me with its more vibrant greens and brighter exposure.

In this tight bend in the road, the iPhone is brighter and warmer than the Pixel 10 Pro XL.

iPhone 17 Pro vs. Pixel 10 Pro XL: Zoom quality

One reason to buy a Pro phone is to shoot with a telephoto camera that reaches farther than you can move your feet. The telephoto on the iPhone 17 Pro now finally has a 48-megapixel sensor and offers a 4x optical zoom, while the Pixel 10 Pro XL’s 48-megapixel camera has a 5x optical zoom.

But we also have to consider the 2x (both), 8x (iPhone) and 10x (Pixel) ranges, which each company calls «optical image quality,» because those use a crop of the main camera and the telephoto camera, respectively.

I promised we’d get back to this scene for a good reason. From the same spot as the main camera image earlier, these use the 4x and 5x zoom levels of each camera. For a fall-color photo, I’m partial to the brighter, more saturated iPhone photo. The Pixel shot is also good, but slightly muted in comparison to tamp down the highlights on the leaves. In each photo, the headline of the sign affixed to the bench is clearly readable — a sign so far away that I didn’t even notice it from the vantage point where the photos were taken.

Here I go again, taking photos directly into the sun. But this time it’s with the iPhone’s 8x zoom and the Pixel’s 10x zoom. They’ve both handled the brightness and color of the last moments before sunset well, but the iPhone has captured the sun’s glow better and has better managed the light fringing on the clouds. Notably, though, the notorious lens flare from the iPhone is a big distraction, whereas the Pixel has avoided it.

One surprise about photographing with these two phones is that I’m reaching for the 2x zoom level more often, which is a crop of the main camera’s sensor, and not the telephoto camera. In this pair, the iPhone’s white balance lighting up the fog in gold hues grabs my eye right away. The Pixel looks like it wants to give a «correct» temperature, not one that reflects the conditions. That said, the light streaks are more dramatic in the Pixel’s photo, and it’s sharper overall. Still, I prefer the iPhone’s version.

Also worth mentioning: Google’s processing has delivered a 50-megapixel image, so even though it’s recording just the middle portion of the sensor, the final shot is upscaled well. The iPhone at 2x records a 12-megapixel photo, regardless of which resolution mode you’ve selected.

Another photo shot using the 2x zoom levels in each camera. The Pixel 10 Pro XL’s main camera has a slightly narrower field of view compared to the iPhone, so when cropped in the framing is a little tighter. And here we see the iPhone photo being brighter and more saturated, though not by a lot. Still, the Pixel image comes across as muted — I’d want to punch up the color and brightness in editing later if this were the only camera I had with me.

Here are two examples of why a long telephoto option is great to have in a phone. I’m all for «zooming with your feet,» but a mountain that’s miles away isn’t going to be much bigger in the frame without a whole lot of walking. With a telephoto, however, it’s like the mountain comes to me.

The iPhone 17 Pro photo of Mount Adams at 4x zoom captures lots of detail in the grass, the trees and the mountain itself, all at 48-megapixel resolution. However, it does feel underexposed to me on the gray, cloudy day.

The Pixel 10 Pro XL image at 5x is also full of detail and resolution, but has better color and exposure. Straight out of the camera, the Pixel takes this one.

With an 8x and 10x zoom, the compression of the mountain, cloud and trees creates an even more dramatic photo. Again, the Pixel’s exposure and color have created a better image. The Pixel image has been scaled up to 50 megapixels from the telephoto sensor’s crop, so credit to the processing here. The iPhone’s 8x zoom creates 12-megapixel images; it’s more true to what the sensor is recording, but you don’t get as many pixels overall. That said, resolution isn’t everything, and the 8x photos have been consistently good.

After the two Mount Adams photos in which the Pixel 10 Pro XL ran counter to its trend, in this 2x zoom example, it’s back to being more muted and less vibrant. The iPhone 17 Pro renders the yellow leaves, green moss and a more pleasing overall exposure. It’s not that the Pixel rendered a bad image, but for this scene, the iPhone better matches what I saw.

iPhone 17 Pro vs. Pixel 10 Pro XL: Night modes

We’re used to phone cameras like the Pixel and iPhone handling low-light and night photos almost effortlessly, but it’s still one of the more difficult tasks a smartphone camera takes on.

Technically, these photos don’t count as Night mode images because, although it was dusk and rapidly getting dark, both cameras had enough light to shoot the scene with their main cameras at full 48- and 50-megapixel resolutions. Here I would favor the iPhone’s slightly warmer tones, but they’re both acceptable images.

Let’s pile on the darkness: Nighttime outside, taking a picture through the window of a dark bar with a full spectrum of lighting. The colors are great in both, and the Pixel 10 Pro XL image is high-resolution enough to read the poster inside and even some recognizable bottle labels. The iPhone 17 Pro’s image is 12 megapixels, but it also looks good. There are a few areas of motion blur in both pointing to longer shutter speeds, but that’s not a surprise in a dimly lit environment like this.

Is it too early for holiday lights? Not here. Although the photos are similar, zooming in reveals more resolution and detail in the Pixel 10 Pro XL photo. It’s a little soft in details like the brick pattern on the bell tower. Both photos were captured using the main cameras, not the ultrawide, as you might think from the angle of the tower.

iPhone 17 Pro vs. Pixel 10 Pro XL: Selfie

Who would have guessed that a selfie camera would get some of the biggest improvements this year? The iPhone 17 Pro now includes an 18-megapixel camera with a square sensor that can capture vertical or horizontal selfies without turning the physical phone. The Pixel 10 Pro XL’s front camera is the same 42-megapixel sensor from the previous year’s model, but it outputs only 10-megapixel images.

Not to be repetitive, but the results from the selfie cameras mostly match what we’ve seen with the rear cameras: The iPhone’s image is brighter and more saturated, though in direct sunlight, the light on my face comes close to getting blown out to white. The Pixel’s image is again muted, presumably correcting for the bright sunlight.

After I stepped back into the shadow of the tree, the photos were more similar in tone and color. The iPhone may have a slight edge here in terms of the saturation in the leaves, but as for the distracted guy in the middle, there’s plenty of detail in both the facial hair and the patterned sweater.

iPhone 17 Pro vs. Pixel 10 Pro XL: Which has the better camera?

Neither camera offers the type of breakthrough that would compel someone to jump ecosystems just for camera performance. An iPhone owner is far more likely to upgrade to the iPhone 17 Pro from an older iPhone, for example. Both are top quality, and the strengths of each come down mostly to your preference for the operating system. In the case of the iPhone 17 Pro versus the Pixel 10 Pro XL, the differences turn out not to be drastic. (If you’re an Android owner looking to move up based on photo quality, I recommend revisiting my look at the Pixel 10 Pro XL vs. the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra.)

That said, I was surprised to find the Pixel’s performance to be more muted and naturalistic in general; often it’s the Android phone that pushes the saturation and contrast too high (or maybe that’s just the Galaxy S25 Ultra). There are other factors beyond sensor and image quality that might compel you to pick the Pixel, such as the Gemini integration that enables photo editing via voice commands, or the ability to capture images at 100x and then use generative AI to reconstruct details that would otherwise be fuzzy.

However, although both phones have great cameras, I prefer the iPhone 17 Pro’s overall performance.

Technologies

Let T-Mobile Pick Up the Tab. Get a Free iPhone 17 With a New Line

If you’ve been looking to add a new line or switch carriers, you can scoop up Apple’s latest flagship on T-Mobile’s dime.

Apple’s new iPhone 17 typically costs $830 for the 256GB configuration, or up to $1,030 for the 512GB configuration. However, T-Mobile isoffering it to customers for free if they meet certain qualifications. If you’ve been looking to trade in your old device or choose an eligible plan, now is a great time to nab this deal.

T-Mobile doesn’t mention a deadline for this deal’s end, but it’s best to act fast if you’ve been wanting the latest iPhone.

To get a free iPhone 17, you’ll need to switch to T-Mobile on an Experience Beyond or Experience More plan and open a new line. You can also choose a Better Value plan, but you must add at least three lines with that plan to get your phone. You can also add a new line on a qualifying plan to score the deal, so long as you also have an eligible device to trade in.

Buyers are still responsible for the $35 activation fee. You’ll get bill credits for 24 months that amount to your phone’s cost. Additionally, you can only get up to four devices with a new line on a qualifying plan.

Note that newer phones will net you more trade-in credits, but an iPhone 6 will net you at least $400 off. The iPhone 17 Pro is also free with a trade-in of an eligible device on an Experience Beyond plan. The iPhone 17 Pro Max is just over $4 per month right now, with the same qualifications.

We’ve also got a list of the best phone deals, if you’d like to shop around.

Why this deal matters

The iPhone 17 series is the latest in Apple’s ecosystem. These smartphones are made to work with Apple Intelligence, include faster chips, offer improved camera performance and show off Apple’s trademark gorgeous design. Starting at $830, they’re not the cheapest phones around, so carrier deals like this one are the best way to save some serious cash.

Continue Reading

Technologies

How Team USA’s Olympic Skiers and Snowboarders Got an Edge From Google AI

Google engineers hit the slopes with Team USA’s skiers and snowboarders to build a custom AI training tool.

Team USA’s skiers and snowboarders are going home with some new hardware, including a few gold medals, from the 2026 Olympics. Along with the years of hard work that go into being an Olympic athlete, this year’s crew had an extra edge in their training thanks to a custom AI tool from Google Cloud.

US Ski and Snowboard, the governing body for the US national teams, oversees the training of the best skiers and snowboarders in the country to prepare them for big events, such as national championships and the Olympics. The organization partnered with Google Cloud to build an AI tool to offer more insight into how athletes are training and performing on the slopes.

Video review is a big part of winter sports training. A coach will literally stand on the sidelines recording an athlete’s run, then review the footage with them afterward to spot errors. But this process is somewhat dated, Anouk Patty, chief of sport at US Ski and Snowboard, told me. That’s where Google came in, bringing new AI-powered data insights to the training process.

Google Cloud engineers hit the slopes with the skiers and snowboarders to understand how to build an actually useful AI model for athletic training. They used video footage as the base of the currently unnamed AI tool. Gemini did a frame-by-frame analysis of the video, which was then fed into spatial intelligence models from Google DeepMind. Those models were able to take the 2D rendering of the athlete from the video and transform it into a 3D skeleton of an athlete as they contort and twist on runs. 

Final touches from Gemini help the AI tool analyze the physics in the pixels, according to Ravi Rajamani, global head of Google’s AI Blackbelt team. which worked on the project. Coaches and athletes told the engineers the specific metrics they wanted to track — speed, rotation, trajectory — and the Google engineers coded the model to make it easy to monitor them and compare between different videos. There’s also a chat interface to ask Gemini questions about performance.

«From just a video, we are actually able to recreate it in 3D, so you don’t need expensive equipment, [like] sensors, that get in the way of an athlete performing,» Rajamani said.

Coaches are undeniably the experts on the mountain, but the AI can act as a kind of gut check. The data can help confirm or deny what coaches are seeing and give them extra insight into the specifics of each athlete’s performance. It can catch things that humans would struggle to see with the naked eye or in poor video quality, like where an athlete was looking while doing a trick and the exact speed and angle of a rotation. 

«It’s data that they wouldn’t otherwise have,» Patty said. The 3D skeleton is especially helpful because it makes it easier to see movement obscured by the puffy jackets and pants athletes wear, she said. 

For elite athletes in skiing and snowboarding, making small adjustments can mean the difference between a gold medal and no medal at all. Technological advances in training are meant to help athletes get every available tool for improvement.

«You’re always trying to find that 1% that can make the difference for an athlete to get them on the podium or to win,» Patty said. It can also democratize coaching. «It’s a way for every coach who’s out there in a club working with young athletes to have that level of understanding of what an athlete should do that the national team athletes have.»

For Google, this purpose-built AI tool is «the tip of the iceberg,» Rajamani said. There are a lot of potential future use cases, including expanding the base model to be customized to other sports. It also lays the foundation for work in sports medicine, physical therapy, robotics and ergonomics — disciplines where understanding body positioning is important. But for now, there’s satisfaction in knowing the AI was built to actually help real athletes.

«This was not a case of tech engineers building something in the lab and handing it over,» Rajamani said. «This is a real-world problem that we are solving. For us, the motivation was building a tool that provides a true competitive advantage for our athletes.»

Continue Reading

Technologies

Virtual Boy Review: Nintendo’s Oddest Switch Accessory Yet Is an Immersive ’90s Museum

No one needs a Virtual Boy. But I always wanted one. And now it’s living with me at last.

On my desk is a Nintendo device that looks like equipment stolen from a cyberpunk optical shop. It’s big, it’s red and black, it sits on a tripod, it has an eyepiece, and it has a Nintendo Switch 2 nestled inside. Hello, Virtual Boy, you’re back.

Nintendo has made a lot of weird consoles over the years, but the Virtual Boy was the weirdest. And the shortest lived. Released in 1995 and discontinued a year later, it lived for a blink of an eye during my final year in college. I never really had time to consider buying one.

It would have been perfect for me, a Game Boy fan who was in love with the idea of VR even back then. Nintendo has been flirting with virtual reality in various forms for decades, and the Virtual Boy was the biggest swing. But it wasn’t VR at all, really. It was a 3D game console in red and black monochrome, a 3D Game Boy in tripod form.

I’m setting the stage because right now you can order a $100 Virtual Boy recreation that’s a big, strange Switch accessory. It’s staring at me now, taking up a lot of space. It’s too big to fit in a bag. It’s a tabletop console, really, and Nintendo has created this Virtual Boy viewer as a way to play a set of free-with-subscription games on the Switch and Switch 2.

Is it worth your money? I’d call it a museum-piece collectible, not a serious piece of gaming hardware. Still, my kid stuck his head in, played 3D Wario Land, and came out declaring it was really cool. He loves old retro games. But I don’t know how often he’ll pop his head back in.

Nintendo’s first stab at 3D now feels like a museum piece

For comparison, I pulled my old Nintendo 3DS XL out of the drawer where it had been tucked away and booted it up, marveling again that Nintendo actually made a glasses-free 3D game handheld once upon a time. The 3DS is a far more capable and advanced game system, but consider the Virtual Boy an ancient attempt to get there first. 

The Virtual Boy was a monochrome red-and-black LED display system, a tabletop-only device that was neither handheld nor TV-connected. The Nintendo Switch’s tabletop-style game modes feel like a bit of an evolutionary link to the Virtual Boy, so it’s poetic that the Switch pops into the new Virtual Boy to power the games and provide the display.

The plastic Virtual Boy is just an odd set of VR goggles for the Switch, but with a red filter on the lenses. Also, you can’t wear it. You keep your head stuck in it.

Awkward and easy to use

All the trappings on this recreation look like the old Virtual Boy but don’t work: You can see a simulated headphone jack, controller port, a sort of knob on top. I just unsnap the plastic case and slide the Switch in, carefully, and then snap it back over. That’s all it is.

To control it, you use the Switch controllers detached or another Switch-compatible controller. Launching the Virtual Boy app — free on the eShop, but you need a Switch Online Plus Expansion Pack account, which costs $50 a year, or $80 for a family membership — splits the Switch display into two smaller, distorted screens. In the Virtual Boy, it looks properly 3D. When I’m done playing, I pop the Switch back out.

As I said in my first hands-on, the big foam-covered eyepiece is more than wide enough for big glasses, and was fine to dip my face into. Getting a comfortable angle to stay playing for a while is another challenge. The Virtual Boy’s included tripod-like stand can adjust the angle, but not as wide as I’d like. I’m sort of hunched over while playing, which gives me a bit of pain. Leaning on the table with my controllers in hand helps.

The red-lensed front eyepiece can be removed, and a later software update will allow Virtual Boy games to be played in several color mixes beyond red and black. Also, you can unscrew an inner bracket to hold the Switch 2 and swap in an included Switch-sized bracket instead. The Switch Lite doesn’t work with the Virtual Boy, however.

The weirdness is my type of indie

All you get right now are seven of the 16 games Nintendo has promised to release for the Virtual Boy. Believe it or not, there were only 22 games ever released for this system. The 16 will include two that were never released before, which is a fun collector’s novelty. 

But what’s amazing to me now is that, sinking into these oddball retro games with their pixelated NES-slash-Game Boy aesthetics in red and black, they feel weirdly timely. The janky, oddball, almost-parallel-universe Nintendo vibe feels like the indie retro aesthetic that’s been big for a while now. After all these years, is the Virtual Boy now finally awesome?

Games like UFO 50 (a compilation of new indie games made to feel like an archive of ’80s games for a console that never was) and indie consoles like Panic Playdate (still my favorite black and white mini handheld, a home for all sorts of homebrew retro games) match my feeling diving into these Virtual Boy games and figuring them out.

Wario Land is probably the best: A side-scrolling Wario game with multiple depth levels, it gives me Game Boy Mario game vibes. Golf has multiple holes and an aiming system, and it’s relaxed and basic (and hard to perfect). 3D Tetris has you dropping blocks down a well to fill in layers, with a Tron-like puzzle feel. Red Alert’s wireframe 3D shooter design is like Star Fox, but boiled all the way down to simple vector lines. Galactic Pinball has several tables, and it’s some lovely, very old-school 3D Nintendo pinball fun. Teleroboxer is Punch-Out with robots, with a style that also reminds me of the early Switch game Arms. And The Mansion of Innsmouth is a creepy 3D dungeon-crawling game (in Japanese) where you try to get to exits before time runs out… or monsters get you.

The remaining games coming this year include Mario Tennis, another Tetris game, a wireframe 3D racer, a 3D reinvention of the original Mario Bros. game called Mario Clash and a 3D Space Invaders. By the end of Nintendo’s release schedule, a good chunk of Virtual Boy’s catalog will be there.

A novelty that’s niche as hell

Worth it? Again, if you love weird and retro, and are intrigued by lost Nintendo 3D games, then yes. But if you’re looking for cutting-edge, then no.

Keep in mind: You can buy a cheaper $25 cardboard set of goggles for the Switch that lets you play the Virtual Boy games, too (or use the old Labo VR goggles Nintendo made in 2019, if you have them). That’s a more sensible path. There are even unofficial emulators for Virtual Boy games on the Meta Quest and Apple Vision Pro. But who said the Virtual Boy was sensible?

A Nintendo game system that’s a big set of red goggles on a tripod is inherently absurd. And I welcome its weird footprint in my home, because that’s exactly who I am. But it’s also a testament to Nintendo’s perpetual interest in the bleeding edge of gaming. VR, glasses-free 3D, AR, modular consoles… Nintendo’s poking around the edges. 

Is the Virtual Boy a sign that Nintendo could make its own VR or AR game system again someday soon, or as an extension of the Switch 2? Who knows? Shigeru Miyamoto, Nintendo’s legendary video game designer, sounded intrigued and elusive about it when I asked him last year. But there’s never any real way to guess where Nintendo’s heading. The Virtual Boy is a museum-piece reminder of that.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media