Camera Shootouts

Xiaomi 14T Pro vs vivo V40 Pro: Camera Shootout

Camera fight between two Chinese smartphones plus two German camera specialists

Published

on

We have reached this point in time where the best smartphone cameras are not limited to flagship models anymore. It’s also where tech brands add a “Pro” superlative even to midrange offerings.

The Xiaomi 14T Pro and vivo V40 Pro are just two among the many “Pro”-labeled midrangers launched this 2024. Their focus? None other than their Pro-like camera capabilities for less.

But which is the overall midrange marvel when it comes to smartphone-tography? Let’s check out in this head-to-head camera battle.

T, V, or B(oth)?

T and V are Xiaomi and vivo’s midrange series respectively. And as coincidental as it seems, these two Chinese phone brands have also partnered up with two German camera specialists — Leica and ZEISS, to be very precise.

Camera-wise, the 14T Pro and V40 Pro are quite similar but still different in some aspects.

Xiaomi 14T Pro vivo V40 Pro
Wide 50MP f/1.6
Light Fusion 900
1/1.31” sensor size
OIS + PDAF
50MP f/1.9
Sony IMX921
1/1.56” sensor size
OIS + PDAF
Ultra-Wide 12MP f/2.2
120º FoV (Field of View)
50MP f/2.0
119º FoV (Field of View)
Telephoto 50MP f/2.0
2.6x optical zoom (60mm)
50MP f/1.85
2x optical zoom (50mm)
Selfie 50MP f/2.0
92º FoV (Field of View)
32MP f/2.0
80.8 FoV (Field of View)

Although both phones have 50MP wide and telephoto shooters, the differentiating factors narrow down to the actual sensor used, aperture, and even the focal length — especially when zooming in optically.

Moreover, the biggest gaps can be seen among their ultra-wide lenses as well as their front-facing shooters.

Naturally Authentic?

Camera hardware is just a fraction of the actual shootout. I’m here to help you see how each phone produces images in various scenarios and shooting conditions.

Photo samples are distributed in sections based on one’s focal length, subject, or mode they were shot in.

For fairness’ sake, I have used the default color shooting profile of each phone — namely Xiaomi’s Leica Authentic and vivo’s ZEISS Natural.

Disclaimer: Photos were all taken using Auto Mode with AI scene detection turned on (otherwise stated). These images were collaged, resized, and labeled for faster loading and better preview. No color correction, zoomed-in cropping, nor any other type of photo manipulation were applied.

Wide (1x)

While both have 50MP cameras, the sensors equipped and their varying sizes, lens opening, and even optics are still all different.

Even the camera partnerships and camera profiles made for each brand differ. These snaps might just prove everything.

W1

W2

W3

W4

W5

W6

W7

W8

W9

W10

Ultra-Wide (UWA)

The megapixel count of each phone’s ultra-wide cameras might be the biggest disparity we can ever find here. But does that make a big of a difference in the actual photo output?

U1

U2

U3

U4

U5

U6

U7

U8

Zoom (Telephoto)

For the most equal results possible, I’ve opted to use Xiaomi 14T Pro’s 2.6x magnification on the vivo V40 Pro as well.

Using 2x on the 14T Pro might just result into a digitally-cropped photo based on the phone’s wide (1x) sensor.

T1

T2

T3

T4

T5

T6

T7

T8

Zoom (5x Digital)

While both phones lack a dedicated 5x periscope zoom lens, it doesn’t stop me from pushing the limits as both phones provide 5x zoom option upon firing up that camera app.

Z1

Z2

Z3

Z4

Z5

Food

Each phone’s shooting profiles either make or break the overall quality of the shot. Food is never an exception to that.

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

Portrait Mode

Both smartphones also possess a dedicated Portrait Mode with several focal length options mimicking an actual camera lens.

Then again, for the fairest results, either 23/24mm or 35mm options were used. Xiaomi’s other lens choices are far off from vivo’s selection (50mm vs 60mm, 75mm vs 80mm, 100mm vs 125mm).

P1

P2

P3

P4

P5

P6

P7

P8

Low-Light

Now that night shots have been introduced in the previous section, it’s also the best time to feature the low-light prowess both phones possess.

*These were all taken using Auto Mode, NOT the dedicated Night Mode. Each phone’s AI auto-scene detection may or may not have activated the additional longer time exposure. The author had too much going on in his head during the time of this shooting.

LL1 | 1x Wide

LL2 | 1x Wide

LL3 | Ultra-Wide

LL4 | 1x Wide

LL5 | 1x Wide

LL6 | 1x Wide

LL7 | 1x Wide

LL8 | Telephoto Zoom

LL9 | 1x Wide

LL10 | Ultra-Wide

LL11 | 1x Wide

LL12 | 1x Wide

LL13 | Telephoto Zoom

LL14 | 1x Wide

LL15 | 1x Wide

Results

Familiar users might have already guessed it. The plethora of photographs above don’t lie.

A — vivo V40 Pro

B — Xiaomi 14T Pro

Conclusion

If you own (or have owned) any of Xiaomi’s flagships, there are already some giveaways for you to tell which phone is which.

Stating the obvious, Xiaomi 14T Pro adapts the Leica color science found on its higher-end cousins. That means less punchy colors and the subtle vignetting around the frame — pretty evident in a lot of photo sets such as W1, W2, W6, W8, U4, U5, U6, U7, T6, F2, F3, P5, and P8.

Additionally, 14T Pro’s photos lean more into the cooler side with overall toned-down highlights. Shadows and contrast though can be a little bit inconsistent. I just don’t know what Xiaomi’s AI algorithm favors and how it was taught to deal with certain scenes and subjects.

As for portraits, food, and zoomed shots, the vivo V40 Pro is just way ahead of the game.

The phone has delivered equal amounts of exposure, saturation, contrast, highlights, and shadows altogether. The Xiaomi 14T Pro just made some food snaps less appetizing (F2, F3, F4) and some zoomed photos equally underwhelming (T3, T4, T6, Z1, Z2, Z3).

Moreover, the V40 Pro delivered portraits with a cleaner separation between intricate subject details against that creamy background bokeh (which is modifiable post-shoot). Xiaomi’s 14T Pro is either less contrasty (P1, P6) or just too underexposed (P2, P5).

Not to mention, those ZEISS Style Portraits make portraits as stunning as those taken with actual ZEISS lenses.

Low-Light King

Lastly, both phones gave the opposite output contrary to what each has taken during the day. V40 Pro’s night time photos are more on the cooler side whereas the 14T Pro are warmer.

And by that, low-light shots are, then again, more favorable with the vivo V40 Pro. Pinching in to a lot of these shots, noise grain is very evident on the Xiaomi 14T Pro. But to be fair, there’s some over-sharpening going on between these two.

Still, despite some setbacks, sets LL6, LL7, LL8, LL9, LL11, LL12, LL13, and LL15 were looking more appealing on the Xiaomi 14T Pro.

On the other hand, vivo V40 Pro wins my eyes in photos LL1, LL3, and LL14.

Final Thoughts

I had rummaged through the 500+ shots I took on both phones during my Hong Kong slash Macau trip. Picking the best snaps to showcase in this camera duel was NOT and NEVER an easy task. I still wanted to please readers the best photos I’ve taken while still maintaining a distinction.

That being said, the more I look at the photos I’ve taken, the more I realize that, like us human beings, these smartphones have a specific “forte” wherein they excel a lot.

Xiaomi’s 14T Pro is your best pick if you are into photographs that bring more 🎵 drama-ma-ma-ma 🎶 as someone tries to convey ’em. It’s for those who want that subdued colors that are still eye-catching and pleasing most of the time.

If you’ve also been wanting to get a taste of what Leica offers without lavishing for an actual Leica camera set or a pricier Xiaomi flagship (like the recently-announced Xiaomi 15 Pro), the 14T Pro would more than suffice. That’s most especially if you’re going to highlight most of your shots just on social media — but still great for blogs and websites nonetheless.

SEE ALSO: Xiaomi 14T Pro: F1 SG GadgetSnaps, Vibe Check

For overall flexibility though, recommending the vivo V40 Pro is just a no-brainer.

You get vivid yet color-accurate shots (especially thanks to ZEISS’ Natural color profile). You also get the best portraits with actual ZEISS lens bokeh imitations, food shots that are mouthwatering, telephoto shots that are clear whether optically or digitally zoomed, and low-light shots that are truly post-worthy.

SEE ALSO: Taking the vivo V40 Pro to an ITZY concert, a getaway, more

Camera Shootouts

Camera Shootout: HONOR 400 Pro vs TECNO CAMON 40 Premier

Camera battle of two midranger wonders

Published

on

By

In my previous camera smackdown, I clearly stated that we don’t have the HONOR 400 Pro to try out.

Months have passed, the odds were (finally) in my favor as I was able to test it against another midranger wonder, the TECNO CAMON 40 Premier.

Oh CAMON, your HONOR

I’ve decided to clash the HONOR 400 Pro and TECNO CAMON 40 Premier primarily because both phones offer the quintessential triple rear camera system.

HONOR 400 Pro
TECNO CAMON 40 Premier
Wide
200MP f/1.9
1/1.4-inch sensor
Samsung ISOCELL HP3
50MP f/1.88
1/1.56-inch sensor
Sony LYT-701C
Ultra-Wide
12MP f/2.2
50MP f/2.2
Telephoto / Periscope
50MP f/2.4
3x Optical Zoom
50MP f/2.2
3x Optical Zoom
Selfie
50MP f/2.0
50MP f/2.5

Hardware-wise, disparities are quite evident. The TECNO CAMON 40 Premier rocks quad 50MP cameras (including the selfie camera), whereas the HONOR 400 Pro has variations in its overall camera system.

It highlights its 200MP Samsung ISOCELL HP3 main camera while TECNO begs to differ as it packs a sensor made by the Korean giant’s Japanese rival — the newcomer Sony LYT-701C sensor that’s only used in two phones so far (2024’s realme 13 Pro+ being the other).

The opposite happens in HONOR 400 Pro’s ultra-wide lens as it features the smaller 12MP camera.

But, the biggest dealbreaker has got to be the existence of 3x zoom shooters that their base models lack.

Although both acquire the same megapixel count, the HONOR 400 Pro is equipped with a traditional telephoto lens structure while the TECNO CAMON 40 Premier boasts a periscope lens that utilizes a prism design / mirror system for capturing long-range subjects and objects.

Lastly, both phones have 50MP front-facing cameras with slight differences in aperture value.

Sticking with the Standard

Much like any other shootouts, I’ve opted to stick with the standard shooting profiles that both phones have right after setting ’em up: Standard for TECNO, Natural for HONOR.

Disclaimer: Photos were all taken using Auto Mode with AI scene detection turned on. These images were collaged, resized, and labeled for faster loading and better preview. No color correction, zoomed-in cropping, nor any other type of photo manipulation were applied.

Ultra-Wide Angle (UWA)

Similar lens diaphragm, totally different megapixel count.
Does that alone make a far cry?

U1

U2

U3

U4

U5

U6

U7

Main (1x + 2x)

The massive 200-megapixel main camera of the HONOR 400 Pro is four times larger compared to TECNO CAMON 40 Premier’s already capable 50MP Sony sensor. Obviously, that comes in very handy when taking zoomed shots via in-sensor cropping.

However, can you even tell which sample belongs to which smartphone?

M1

M2

M3

 

M4

M5

M6

M7

M8

M9

3x Optical Zoom

The crème de la crème of these two phones are their zoom shooters.

While lens structure are different (again, telephoto for HONOR while periscope for TECNO), which one gives THE better optically-zoomed shots?

ZO1

ZO2

ZO3

ZO4

ZO5

ZO6

ZO7

ZO8

ZO9

ZO10

ZO11

ZO12

ZO13

Beyond 5x Zoom

Given that both phones are capable of shooting optically up to 3x, how can each phone go beyond 5x zoom?

ZB1

ZB2

ZB3

ZB4

ZB5

ZB6

ZB7

ZB8

ZB9

ZB10

Food

Hardware is one. Software is for another.

Food shots are one of the best ways to know how good (or bad) a phone is when it comes to photo quality and color accuracy.

F1

F2A

F2B

F3A

F3B

F4

F5

Portrait Mode

Taking creamy~licious portraits shouldn’t be a rare feat among modern-day midrangers.

But can TECNO’s standard Portrait Mode compete with HONOR’s Harcourt prowess?

PM1

PM2

PM3

PM4

PM5

Low-Light

I said it before and I’ll say it again.

Taking shots in low-light is what makes or breaks a phone’s photography performance.

LL1

LL2

LL3

LL4

LL5

BONUS: Selfie

B1A  |  Ultra-Wide Portrait ON

B1B  |  1x Wide Portrait ON

B2A  |  1x Wide Portrait OFF

B2B  |  Ultra-Wide Portrait OFF

Results

Notice a pattern? Or lack thereof?

Well, the results are definitely consistent.

A — TECNO CAMON 40 Premier

B — HONOR 400 Pro

Conclusion

At first, it’s kind of hard to distinguish which phone is which.

For instance, the ultra-wide, 1x wide, and 2x photos of the TECNO CAMON 40 Premier leaned more onto the cooler side. However, the contrary happens in Sample Sets M5 / M8 / M9 where the shots are warmer than its HONOR counterpart.

If you zoom in further, HONOR 400 Pro’s 200MP main sensor doesn’t have a huge advantage — delivering somewhat the same amount of detail compared to the CAMON 40 Premier.

Except for Photos ZO6 / ZO8 / ZO9 / ZB7 / ZB8, consistency in warmness continues among photos taken in the CAMON 40 Premier’s 3x periscope zoom lens.

How natural is “Natural”?

Despite choosing the “Natural” Color Mode in the HONOR 400 Pro, Sets M4 / ZO12 / ZO13 / LL5 truly showed lack of saturation with its washed out photos. That same look is even evident in 5 out of 7 food shots.

It also struggles to capture a balanced dynamic range. Making Set M3 as an example, look at how blown-out the highlights of the night lights have turned out in HONOR versus TECNO.

There were times when HONOR takes brighter photos but at the expense of amping up shadows and losing contrast (M4 / M8 / ZB2 / ZB3). Inconsistently, the results turned out the other way around in Sets U1 / U2 / U4 with lower exposure and darker shadows.

Photos taken at night also looked dimmer versus TECNO’s post-ready low-light takes.

HONOR’s “Natural” color profile doesn’t look natural at all with its inaccuracy and inconsistencies compared to how I / we perceive the actual subjects in real life.

That’s not to say the HONOR 400 Pro produces bad photos. Honestly, there are times where I preferred the HONOR more — Samples ZO6 / ZB7 / ZB8 / ZB9 are living proof to that.

If there’s a category where I think HONOR has nailed, it’s definitely the Portrait Mode with better shots and depth segmentation, properly showcasing its Harcourt specialty. Additionally, selfies looked better no matter where and how you look at it

Higher price ≠ Higher performance

Reiterating what I’ve said in my HONOR 400 vs vivo V50 camera showdown, the HONOR 400 Pro and TECNO CAMON 40 Premier are also two midrangers positioned in different levels of the same sailing ship.

Price-wise, the HONOR 400 Pro costs more at PhP 32,999. Meanwhile, TECNO’s CAMON 40 Premier is heaps cheaper at just PhP 21,999. That makes it a very contending smartphone in the upper-midrange space.

For the same price, you’ll only get the HONOR 400 at PhP 22,999 along its absence of a dedicated telephoto lens.

While there are more factors to consider in this huge price gap such as a faster chipset, bigger battery capacity, larger internal storage, and several other hardware nuances, it’s safe to say that a higher price tag isn’t always synonymous to having the best cameras. This camera shootout alone is just one among many testaments to that.

READ: It’s the little things that make the HONOR 400 Pro 5G a daily wonder

At the end of the day, it’s your choice as a consumer which smartphone camera (both in image quality and overall look) dominates your priorities and overall purchasing power.

Now, if you’d ask me, the TECNO CAMON 40 Premier ultimately bags that “bang for the buck” title for offering the better camera flexibility despite its more affordable price tag.

SEE ALSO: TECNO CAMON 40 Premier review: Cảm ơn, CAMON!

Continue Reading

Camera Shootouts

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7 vs OPPO Find N5 – Camera Shootout

Foldables, fight!

Published

on

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

It feels like just yesterday we were comparing three foldables in one big camera shootout. In reality, it’s been a full year — and a lot has changed. This time, it’s down to two powerhouses: the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7 and the OPPO Find N5.

Both are book-style foldables launched globally in 2025 — Samsung in July, OPPO earlier in February. Both also come with major physical changes: they’re slimmer, taller, and in the Fold7’s case, slightly wider too. But the real battle lies inside: the cameras.

Samsung brought over the 200MP main shooter from the Galaxy S25 Ultra to the Fold7. The rest of the system, however, didn’t see major changes. Meanwhile, OPPO gave the Find N5 a full-on imaging overhaul.

On paper

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7 OPPO Find N5
Main Camera 200 MP, f/1.7, 24 mm (wide), 1/1.3″, PDAF, OIS  50 MP, f/1.89, 1/1.56″, OIS (HyperTone wide-angle) 
Ultrawide 12 MP, f/2.2, 120°, 1.4 µm, PDAF  (Not specified in source – likely none or under 50 MP)
Telephoto / Periscope 10 MP, f/2.4, 67 mm, PDAF, OIS, 3× optical zoom  50 MP periscope telephoto with macro (~10 cm macro) 
Video Recording 8K@30 fps, 4K@60 fps, 1080p@60/120/240 fps, 720p@960 fps, gyro-EIS, 10-bit HDR10+  LivePhoto with enhanced EIS; video specs not detailed 
Selfie Cameras Dual 10 MP front cams (cover + inner display)  Not detailed in provided source

Specs tell part of the story, but photos reveal the truth. As always, the only edits applied were for cropping and resizing to fit our format.

So how do they compare in real-world shooting?

W (1x)

w1

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

w2

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

W3

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

W4

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

W5

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

W6

W7

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

W8

W9

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

W10

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

W11

W12

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

Zoom A (2x-3x)

ZA1

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZA2

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZA3

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZA4

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZA5

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZA6

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZA7

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZA8

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZA9

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZA10

ZA11

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZOOM B (6x and up)

ZB1

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZB2

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZB3

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZB4

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZB5

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

ZB6

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

Selfie (Outer Camera)

S1

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

S2

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

S3

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

S4

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

Low light

L1

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

L2

Galaxy Z Fold7 Find N5

Blind test reveal & first impressions

Did you guess which was which?
A is the OPPO Find N5. B is the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7.

Now that you know, a few things stand out:

  • The Find N5 consistently produced brighter images, especially in low light. OPPO’s post-processing really flexes here.
  • The Galaxy Z Fold7 leaned toward a more natural, life-like output, a noticeable shift from Samsung’s traditionally saturated look.

That said, using the Fold7’s main camera at 1x felt… off. The focal length feels awkward — too wide for most shots but just right for taking main-camera selfies. I found myself constantly switching to 2x or 3x, which makes up a big chunk of the samples here.

Flat or flavorful?

One of the biggest differences is in how the two phones handle processing and depth.

Take the Brooklyn Bridge photo through cyclone wire (W8):

  • The Find N5 nailed it with more pronounced depth and contrast.
  • The Fold7 came off a little flat in comparison.

But this wasn’t always the case. In the shot of the yellow vehicle (w5) and in main-camera selfies (W12), the Fold7 delivered bokeh that looked more organic.

Overall, the Find N5 clearly does more processing after you hit the shutter, while the Fold7 gives you what it sees, almost instantly. Your preference between a more “finished” photo and a natural one will really show here.

Zoom zoom

Let’s be real — this wasn’t even close.

At 6x and beyond, the OPPO Find N5 easily outclassed the Fold7. Detail, sharpness, and clarity all went to OPPO’s corner. Samsung’s telephoto performance just didn’t keep up.

Final thoughts

If we’re talking eye-catching, the OPPO Find N5 wins out of the gate. Brighter shots, better zoom, more punch overall.

But the Galaxy Z Fold7 holds its own. At 1x to 3x — and especially in low light — it sometimes captures a mood the Find N5 over-brightens. The beer glass in a dimly lit bar is a perfect example: OPPO lit it up; Samsung kept the vibe.

At the end of the day, this comes down to what you value.

  • Want bright, punchy, more dramatic photos? Go OPPO.
  • Prefer subtler, moodier, more natural output? Samsung’s your bet.

That said — if we’re choosing a winner in camera versatility and polish, the OPPO Find N5 edges ahead.

Continue Reading

Camera Shootouts

HONOR 400 vs vivo V50: Camera Shootout

Comeback camera showdown of the two Chinese mids

Published

on

By

Just like a year ago, HONOR and vivo both step on the arena again for a head-on midrange camera showdown.

Although the HONOR 400 Pro exists, we clearly don’t have it. This just means we have to compare it to the next ideal candidate, the base HONOR 400.

This is up against vivo’s one and lonely V50. After all, the “vivo V50 Pro” simply doesn’t exist in vivo’s 2025 glossary.

HONOR thy vivo

The best reason to compare these two are none other than their similar 1x wide + UWA camera combo.

HONOR 400
vivo V50
Wide
200MP f/1.9
Samsung ISOCELL HP3
1/1.4” sensor
50MP f/1.88
OmniVision OV50E
1/1.55” sensor
Ultra-Wide
12MP f/2.2
50MP f/1.9
Selfie
50MP f/2.0
50MP f/2.0

Both phones possess a main shooter with a wide aperture closing to f/1.9. But, numbers-wise, HONOR 400 offers four times the megapixel count offered by the vivo V50 (200MP vs 50MP).

The equipped Samsung sensor is also a tad bit larger compared to its OmniVision counterpart.

The opposite happens in their ultra-wide modules. The vivo V50 has the upper-hand with its wider and bigger 50MP f/1.9 unit. Meanwhile, the HONOR 400 has a 12MP f/2.2 shooter.

One thing they obviously met head-to-head is none other than their 50MP f/2.0 selfie cameras.

All Natural

Both the HONOR 400 and vivo V50 feature a trio of color profile options when shooting photos in the default camera mode: Natural, Vibrant, and Authentic for the HONOR 400.

On the other hand, ZEISS Natural, Vivid, and Textured for the vivo V50.

vivo V50 | 2025

For the second midrange camera shootout of the year, we’re going to stick with the “Natural” mode of both phones. They’re both set by default anyway.

HONOR 400 | 2025

Disclaimer: Photos were all taken using Auto Mode with AI scene detection turned on. These images were collaged, resized, and labeled for faster loading and better preview. No color correction, zoomed-in cropping, nor any other type of photo manipulation were applied.

Ultra-Wide (UWA)

How does a smaller or bigger megapixel count affect the overall quality of the phone’s UWA output?

U1

U2

U3

U4

U5

U6

Wide (1x)

Now onto the main filling: 200MP vs 50MP — does megapixel count really matter?

W1

W2

W3

W4

W5

W6

W7

W8

W9

W10

2x Lossless Zoom

Just because we don’t have a dedicated zoom unit, it doesn’t mean we cannot take photos past 1x.

LZ1

LZ2

LZ3

LZ4

LZ5

LZ6

LZ7

LZ8A

LZ8B

LZ9A

LZ9B

LZ10

Beyond Zoom

Going beyond the lossless zoom limits just to see how far can these two phones take the cake in digital zoom imagery.

BZ1

BZ2

BZ3

BZ4

BZ5

BZ6

BZ7

BZ8

Good Mood for Food

It won’t be a complete camera chow down without a food-dedicated section.

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5A

F5B

Right at Night

Night Mode algorithms make or break a phone’s camera performance.
In this case, which phone is the best when there’s already an absence of natural light?

N1A  |  1x Wide

N1B  |  2x Zoom

N2A  |  1x Wide

N2B  |  2z Zoom

N3A  |  1x -Wide

N3B  |  2x Zoom

N4

N5

N6

N7

BONUS: Portraits and Selfies

Harcourt or ZEISS?
Also, which is the selfie expert among these two midrangers?

P1

P2

S1

S2

S3

S4A  | Regular Selfie

S4B  |  Ultra-Wide Selfie

S5A  | Regular Selfie

S5B  |  Ultra-Wide Selfie

Results

It’s honestly hard to discern which is which, even if you’re familiar with how both phones process photos.

Nevertheless, here are the consistent results:

A — HONOR 400

B — vivo V50

Truthful Thoughts

After spending a Taipei-filled photo session with these two, I can truthfully say no one is a solid final winner as the results were pretty much a mixed bag.

Sometimes, vivo is victorious over its HONOR counterpart — and vice versa.

Starting with their ultra-wide shooters. Sets U1 / U2 / U4 both showed how the V50’s output leans more into the cooler side. However, the opposite happens in its other shots. Honestly, this can be fixed in post if it’s not your cup of tea.

That said, the vivo V50 still has the overall upper-hand with its larger megapixel count and wider aperture. Such configuration creates UWA images that are clearer and less noisy when zoomed in.

Quite an Oddity

Now, when it comes to their main cameras, you’ll notice right away how the HONOR 400 always captures the tighter shot.

That’s due to the fact that it uses an odd focal length of 27mm versus the 23mm found on the V50 — and pretty much any normal smartphone camera would.

Again, something that’s user-preferential as others like it wider. While some like it tighter than ever 👀

Personally, I prefer the wider focal length for overall flexibility — whether preserving the negative space of a photograph or completely cropping it to fit in the perfect aspect ratio when posting on socials.

In the 1x wide category alone, the vivo V50 is my overall pick over the HONOR 400.

HDR and rightful exposure is just one. The color accuracy and consistency is for another.

HONOR 400’s lackluster shots in some parts just proves my unending point that having a larger megapixel count doesn’t necessarily equate to better-looking images.

While the HONOR 400 admittedly has an extra 0.15-inch in its sensor size, vivo still lives with its better color calibration and software algorithms. A true testament to their long-lasting partnership with ZEISS.

Speaking of, ZEISS Style Portraits are just way ahead of the game compared to HONOR’s Harcourt partnership meant for Portraits (P1 / P2).

Some confusion in the conclusion

The 200MP Samsung shooter of the HONOR 400 comes at an obvious advantage when it comes to taking photos in 2x zoom with its heavy reliance on in-sensor cropping.

If you’ll click in one of the shots above and zoom in, the details are clearer compared to what the V50 shows. The latter looks smudged in favor of a noise-free result.

 

Weirdly enough, the HONOR 400 tends to produce brighter shots when taking past 2x in most zoomed shots (LZ1 / LZ2 / LZ3 / LZ8A / LZ9A / LZ9B / BZ1 / BZ5 / BZ6). That’s despite having photos with lower exposure and highlights in the 1x category.

Now when it comes to food, the HONOR 400 delivered unexpected results with its muted colors that made food barely appetizing (F1 / F3 / F5A). Surprisingly, the contrary happened in Sets F4 and F5B as the HONOR 400 had the more scrumptious shots.

Once the sunlight goes out and moonlight fades in, each of the phones’ Night Mode algorithm both kick in.

Honestly, both took equally acceptable photos that are also quite alike in overall exposure, contrast, sharpness, and saturation. Then again, the HONOR 400 always had the tighter shot between shots in 1x and 2x (or beyond).

Last but definitely not the least, selfies.

While I’m never the selfie type of guy, my eyes are crystal clear and aren’t deceitful.

Even if the HONOR 400 brought the “natural-looking” selfies outdoors, it failed big time when used indoors (S1 / S2 / S3). Again, the color inaccuracy and inconcistency is ever-present in this category.

No one would simply use that as their profile photo (or even as their featured portrait in the matchmaking app of their choice).

Kudos though for bringing ultra-wide angle selfies that other flagships fail to bring.

Just A Little Bit Caught in the Middle 🎵🎶

Deciding which of these two midrangers is the true marvel when it comes to photo-taking is simply something you’d be stuck in the middle.

Both phones and their camera systems had some fair share of pros and cons that might make you pick one over another.

Other notable hardware specs such as display tech and size, overall battery capacity and charging standards, plus the familiarity, user-friendliness, and overall software experience are the factors that will make you stay or sway.

One thing’s for sure. both the HONOR 400 and vivo V50 run Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 7 Gen 3 SoC with the 512GB configuration being offered around the same price range: HONOR 400 at EUR 549 while less 39 Euros for the vivo V50 at around EUR 510

It’s just a matter of which phone you’re willing to spend on, which phone is closer to what your heart desires.

Continue Reading

Trending