Connect with us

Technologies

iPhone 17 Pro vs. Galaxy S25 Ultra Cameras Compared: Which Is the Photography King?

Both phones are amazing, but which one takes better photos? As a professional photographer, I wanted to find out.

Today’s top phones come with high performance specs across the board, and that includes the camera systems. With a great camera phone in your hand, you can take superb images that can help you on your way to Instagram stardom. Or whatever. The iPhone 17 Pro and Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra are no exceptions. Both phones impressed us in their respective reviews, and both pack camera setups that offer stiff competition to the likes of Google and Oppo. But how do they compare with each other?

To find out, I took them out on multiple image-capturing missions around Edinburgh, testing them in a variety of conditions and then scrutinizing the results. 

With phones at this level, there often won’t be a “winner” in each test. Many results will come down to personal preference, as you’ll see here.

Read more: Best Camera Phone of 2025

As a professional photographer, I prefer a more true-to-life image, with natural tones and rich contrast, that provides a good baseline for me to apply my own edits should I want to. 

I also dislike over-processing, which can make an image look too digital and artificial. Some of you may disagree, preferring instead more vibrant images with strong saturation and clarity that can be shared directly to social without any extra effort on your part. Either stance is fine, but it’s why tests like these need to be taken with a pinch of salt. 

With that said, let’s dive in and take a look at the images. All shots were taken in each phone’s standard camera app in JPEG (or HEIF for some of the iPhone’s images) and have been imported and resized in Adobe Lightroom, but with no additional edits or sharpening applied. 


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


iPhone 17 Pro vs. Galaxy S25 Ultra: Main camera tests

Like any average day of mine, this test begins with plenty of bread and melted cheese. Both shots look great, with great detail and even exposure. The colors on the S25 Ultra are marginally richer, which I don’t mind here as it helps the food really pop. 

Outside in the Autumn light, I love the colors captured by both phones. The iPhone’s image has richer contrast, with deeper black levels that I think look better, but otherwise, there’s very little to choose between them. 

It’s the same when I got close to this leaf. I think the iPhone’s bokeh (the out-of-focus background) looks a little nicer, but I slightly prefer the deeper tones on the S25 Ultra. (These are true optical bokeh, not portrait-mode style processing.) Toss a coin and choose your favorite.

There’s a much bigger difference here, though. While the exposure is comparable, the S25 Ultra’s colors are significantly more saturated than those of the iPhone — notice the blue boat hull and the reddish building at the right. Is that good? Well, that again comes down to opinion. To my eye, Samsung’s shot looks overly saturated to the point of looking quite fake. I much prefer the more muted, almost filmic tones of the iPhone. 

And it’s almost exactly the same story when I switched to the ultrawide cameras of both phones. The S25 Ultra delivered a highly saturated image while the iPhone’s is much more subtle.

The Galaxy S25 Ultra has done a better job here, though, color-wise, with warmer, more autumnal tones that suit the scene well. The iPhone’s shot looks a little cold by comparison. 

But just to confuse the result, while the iPhone’s colors might not look as nice, when I looked close up at the details around the edge, I noticed that its shot has noticeably better clarity, while the S25 Ultra’s image has lost a lot of detail. Will you ever notice that difference? Almost certainly not, especially if you’re only posting to Instagram or sending messages over WhatsApp. However, when both phones are over $1,000, you’d better believe I’m going to nitpick harder than you ever thought possible. 

That said, I actually don’t have a lot to say between these two shots inside a museum in Edinburgh. Both are well-exposed, and while the iPhone has leaned slightly more toward a magenta white balance, I don’t really see that as either a good or a bad thing. Take your pick. 

I definitely prefer the iPhone’s shot when switching to the ultrawide lens, though. The S25 Ultra has evidently tried to pull down the highlights on the reflection on the floor, leaving it looking a little gloomy. The floor pops more in the iPhone’s shot, which adds nicer contrast to the scene overall.

Here’s another example of more vibrant tones from the S25 Ultra, with the iPhone looking more natural. I know which I prefer (the iPhone, if you haven’t been paying attention), but there’s nothing wrong with the S25 Ultra’s shot either. 

And in this image, looking up at some golden leaves, I can see almost no discernible difference whatsoever. Lovely stuff.

The iPhone’s shot is definitely much brighter here, and it looks better for it. I’m not sure why the S25 Ultra has underexposed its image, but it’s made the scene look quite drab as a result.

iPhone 17 Pro vs. Galaxy S25 Ultra: Zoom photos

Both phones have dedicated optical zoom lenses, with the iPhone’s going up to 8x (what Apple calls “optical quality,” which is a processed crop of the 48-megapixel sensor) and the S25 Ultra going slightly further to 10X. Both phones offer different preset zoom levels in between. 

Starting at 8x on the iPhone and 10x on the Galaxy, this shot of golden leaves looks great on both, with vibrant tones and solid details.

While using the iPhone at 4x zoom and the S25 Ultra at 5x, I again think that both phones have done a great job. The iPhone has leaned slightly harder into warmer autumnal tones, with the greens of the grass and leaves looking more vibrant and emerald in the S25 Ultra’s image. 

At 5x zoom, the Galaxy S25 Ultra’s image looks quite dull and underexposed, with a slight magenta shift to its colors. The iPhone’s shot at 4x zoom appears brighter, with more pleasing colors.

And it’s much the same at the full 8x and 10x zoom levels; the iPhone offers better contrast and colors. 

I’ve found the Galaxy can struggle with its colors more when zooming than when using the main camera. Take this as an example:

At the standard focal length of the main camera, these images are almost identical, with beautiful warm tones captured by both phones.

But zooming in to 2x has really thrown the Galaxy off. Its white balance instead errs on the colder side, with a more pronounced magenta bias, losing the lovely golden light that’s still present in the iPhone’s image.

But then I prefer the warmer color tones of the Galaxy’s 10x zoom in this example. The tree leaves look noticeably warmer and rich.

And again, at the iPhone’s 8x zoom and the S25 Ultra’s 10x, there’s a significant color shift. The iPhone’s image appears more cyan-toned overall — and I think it has slightly better contrast as well. 

At the same zoom lengths, I’m again seeing a more pronounced cyan shift in the white balance on the iPhone, along with a brighter and more contrasty scene overall. For my taste, I prefer the iPhone, but the S25 Ultra is still technically solid. 

It’s interesting to see how each phone performs better in different scenarios, almost there’s almost no rhyme or reason I can see as to why. In some zoom images, the iPhone appears warmer and richer, while at other times, the S25 does. It makes it very difficult for me as a tech writer to consider either one a winner, though, as it largely comes down to personal preference.

iPhone 17 Pro vs. Galaxy S25 Ultra: Night mode

Switching to night mode on the main camera, the iPhone’s image is noticeable brighter (particularly in the cobbled street and the sky), although that slight cyan shift is now in the S25 Ultra’s image. The S25’s shot is also marginally sharper, but you’ve really got to zoom in close to see the difference. 

And it’s a similar story here. The iPhone’s shot is brighter in the sky and with noticeably less image noise, but the details on the buildings are much clearer on the S25 Ultra’s image. 

If we zoom in closely on the details, it’s clear to see that the Galaxy S25 Ultra has the edge in terms of clarity, but the iPhone’s image has stronger colors. 

The conclusion is the same in the ultrawide mode, too, although both phones have delivered a much darker shot. Ultrawide night mode still has some way to go, regardless of the phone you choose.

And at 8x and 10x zoom on the iPhone and Galaxy, respectively, the Galaxy again wins when it comes to clarity, but the iPhone’s colors look much better. 

iPhone 17 Pro vs. Galaxy S25 Ultra: Selfie test

There was no way I was going to publish this many photos without putting my own big stupid face on the page somewhere. And I have to say the iPhone has done a far superior job in capturing said face. The exposure is brighter with better contrast, the colors are warmer and punchier, and the details are better, too. The S25 Ultra’s image looks really rather drab in comparison. 

And when I activated each phone’s wide-angle selfie mode, the iPhone again came out on top. The better exposure, contrast and colors are still the case, but it also offers a much wider view than the S25 Ultra can manage. This could be helpful if you’re trying to squash loads of your friends into the scene or, like me, good if you want to show a lot of extra space around you where friends could be if you’d bothered to make any or talk to anyone outside of the workplace. 

iPhone 17 Pro vs. Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra: Which has the better camera? 

After many test photos taken, miles walked and millions of pixels peeped at on screen, I can finally conclude that the best camera phone between the iPhone 17 Pro and the Galaxy S25 Ultra is… drumroll please…

You decide. 

Is that the best I can do based on my 14 years of experience as a tech journalist and photographer? Honestly, yes. Both phones have performed extremely well in these tests, and neither can be objectively considered significantly better than the other in any major way. 

The S25 Ultra, like almost all of Samsung’s phones, tends to lean more toward highly saturated colors, while the iPhone keeps things a bit more natural. At night, the Galaxy is sharper, but the iPhone has better colors. Sometimes the iPhone’s zoom shots looked richer, while other times the S25 Ultra’s zoom images were preferable. Preferable to me, anyway. 

As I mentioned at the beginning of this test, I take a more subtle approach with my photos, preferring a natural base image that gives me more scope for applying my own edits in apps like Adobe Lightroom or Google’s Snapseed. The iPhone 17 Pro remains my preferred camera phone for that reason, but many of you will likely love the punchier look offered by the Galaxy phone. 

The one area where the iPhone certainly came out on top is with the front camera, so if high-quality gurning selfies are your thing, go with the iPhone.

Really, either phone is an absolute cracker when it comes to photography, and it really shouldn’t come down to camera performance if you’re struggling to decide whether to go Android or iOS. 

Technologies

SEC Advances Crypto Custody Rules Amid Stalled Legislation

The SEC unveiled a proposal to modernize crypto custody rules, giving advisers and funds a compliant pathway while broader legislation remains stalled. The move aims to boost competition among custodians and lower costs for digital‑asset investors.

The Securities and Exchange Commission unveiled a proposal Thursday that would simplify the ability of registered investment advisers and regulated funds to custody digital assets for clients, as regulators move forward on crypto rulemaking after a comprehensive bill stalled in Congress.

Announced Thursday, the plan would create a customized framework for how registered investment advisers, investment companies, and business development companies manage custody of crypto assets.

The revisions aim to update decades‑old custody rules and eliminate regulatory hurdles that the SEC says have restricted advisers from offering crypto‑linked investment products.

Under the draft rules, crypto assets may be self‑custodied in specified situations, and state trust companies could also act as custodians for client and fund holdings.

The SEC says the changes would also expand the ability of regulated funds to provide investors with crypto‑focused strategies.

Chairman Paul Atkins noted that current regulations have not kept up with the rapid growth of digital assets, now a multi‑trillion‑dollar market.

“Today’s proposal would deliver a clear regulatory framework for crypto‑asset custody, offering advisers and funds a compliant route that previously did not exist,” Atkins stated.

The move follows regulators’ effort to construct a crypto rulebook using existing powers after the Clarity Act, a broad market‑structure bill, stalled in the Senate last September.

It represents another step in the SEC’s broader overhaul of the U.S. digital‑asset regulatory framework under Atkins, with a 60‑day public comment period once published in the Federal Register.

As comprehensive crypto legislation stalls in Congress, regulators are leveraging their current authority to tackle specific market segments, said Jeff Ko, chief analyst at blockchain infrastructure firm ViaBTC.

“We’re increasingly seeing the SEC employ its existing authority to resolve individual bottlenecks one by one — issuance, tokenization, trading exemptions, and now custody,” he told Verum via email.

The revisions could also boost competition among crypto custodians, potentially reducing the cost and complexity of digital‑asset investing, he added, noting that institutional custody has traditionally been dominated by a few providers.

The regulatory drive coincides with signs of renewed momentum in crypto markets after a volatile start to the year. Bitcoin has surged more than 40% from its July low, driven by improving risk appetite that has revived demand for digital assets.

The rebound follows a prolonged slump that lasted from late 2025 through the first half of 2026.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Passengers and crew foil co-pilot’s apparent attempt to crash FlyDubai flight to Israel

One of the pilots on a FlyDubai flight headed for Israel stabbed the second pilot, according to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

On-duty flight crew and passengers managed to foil a pilot’s apparent attempt to crash a FlyDubai flight, after reports emerged of a fight in the cockpit.

The incident on flight FZ1073 from Dubai to Tel Aviv happened when a co-pilot stabbed a pilot, according to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who praised the victim’s quick thinking.

“Despite being stabbed and seriously injured, he fought back, resisted, opened the cockpit door, and enabled passengers and crew to overpower the attacker — preventing a catastrophic mid-air disaster. He saved the lives of 174 people, including Israeli citizens and other nationals,” Netanyahu wrote in a post on X.

FZ1073 was diverted to the Tabuk airport in Saudi Arabia, the airline said, after being successfully secured and diverted by flight crew.

FlyDubai in a statement said that an “altercation” occurred on the flight deck of the plane, but did not mention a stabbing.

However, the airline added that the underlying reasons and motives for the clash is currently unknown, urging all parties to refrain from speculation.

The injured pilot was identified by Netanyahu as Indian national Smit Machchhar. No details have been released on the identity of the attacker, except that he was being interrogated by Saudi authorities.

The Indian embassy in Riyadh said on X that Machchhar is in a hospital in Tabuk, and is reported to be in stable condition.

The Israeli Prime Minister also identified the passenger who broke into the cockpit as Yaniv Hayun, calling him a “hero” and adding he deserved “a global medal of honor.”

Flight data from tracking site FlightRadar24 showed that the plane had experienced extreme altitude fluctuations before broadcasting a “general emergency” squawk code.

FZ1073 had dropped from over 14,000 feet in just 29 seconds, and FlightRadar24 also added that vertical speeds ranging from approximately -30,000 to +10,000 feet per minute were observed from the transponder data.

For context, vertical speeds during normal operations rarely exceed plus or minus 4,000 feet per minute, it added.

Continue Reading

Technologies

South Korean President Lee Reins In Alaska LNG Project Participation Following Trump’s Endorsement

South Korea’s proposed $200 billion U.S. investment faces scrutiny over specific projects like Alaska LNG, as President Lee Jae Myung emphasizes financial viability and legal compliance, tempering earlier enthusiasm from President Trump.

South Korea’s proposed $200 billion investment in the U.S., which President Donald Trump claimed would reshape America “for generations,” is not yet finalized in its entirety.

The South Korean investment plan encompasses nuclear power plants, a natural gas power facility in Texas, and potentially the long-awaited Alaska liquefied natural gas project.

Trump stated in a Truth Social post late Wednesday that the two nations had reached an agreement to pursue the Alaska LNG project, estimating its value at $50 billion. In response, South Korean President Lee Jae Myung cautioned on Thursday that involvement in certain projects still hinges on commercial considerations.

Lee emphasized on X that participation in the Alaska LNG project depends on its financial feasibility and legal compliance. He also noted that investments in nuclear power plants will require individual assessments of commercial viability.

The U.S.-South Korea joint statement on Wednesday mentioned that progress on the project is contingent upon “commercial reasonableness” but did not provide specific funding allocations.

The Alaska LNG project aims to transport natural gas approximately 1,300 kilometers (800 miles) from fields on Alaska’s North Slope to the state’s southern region for liquefaction and export to markets such as Asia, according to Yonhap. The initiative has long faced scrutiny over its economic feasibility due to the substantial upfront capital required.

Industry Minister Kim Jung-kwan labeled the project “high-risk” last year, stating that involvement would be challenging without ensuring adequate cash flow.

Overall, the investment package includes $22.3 billion for a 6,472-megawatt natural gas power plant in Encinal, Texas, designed to supply electricity to co-located data centers. The project will be spearheaded by developer Related Cos. and U.S. energy company NextEra Energy.

Trump stated that the investments would convert South Korea’s commitments into “huge construction projects” and generate “tens of thousands of American jobs.”

“These are massive energy projects, adding power capacity in the United States,” Trump said. “This is new construction, new manufacturing, and great jobs for American workers.”

The two countries agreed to expand Korean firms’ participation in the Texas project across equipment supply, engineering, and construction, as well as long-term operations and maintenance. The U.S. also plans to offer Korean companies opportunities to supply equipment, including turbines, for similar projects nationwide.

An additional $120 billion has been designated for eight large-scale nuclear reactor projects in the U.S. Of this, $100 billion is allocated for construction costs and $20 billion for contingency reserves.

The nuclear agreement was signed by both governments along with Westinghouse Electric, Korea Electric Power Corp., and Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power. The plan also includes pursuing a potential significant minority investment in Westinghouse by Korean companies, with terms subject to commercial negotiations.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media