Google, Apple, Samsung, Huawei... Which smartphone captures the most stunning photos of a starry sky?
The photo quality of smartphones continues to improve year after year, to the point where some high-end models are becoming capable even in astrophotography. However, not all models are created equal. In this comparison, we tested the flagship models from Apple, Google, Huawei, and Samsung in a photographic practice that is quite common in the summer.
To more precisely evaluate their performance, we acquired two market leaders: the Apple iPhone 15 Pro and the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra. We also included the Google Pixel 8 Pro in this test bench because it is the only one with a dedicated astrophotography mode. To spice things up, we added the Huawei Pura 70 Ultra, which stood out in low-light photo tests.
- Huawei Pura 70 Ultra
- Apple iPhone 15 Pro
- Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
- Google Pixel 8 Pro
The common point among these camera phones is that they are equipped with bright optics and, most importantly, large sensors comparable to those found in high-end compact cameras. Naturally, the test focuses on the main sensors of these camera phones, as the wide-angle and telephoto sensors are generally much less sensitive. It is worth noting that these devices are recent, premium, and therefore very expensive.
Huawei Pura 70 Ultra, the Chinese Champion
| |
Sensor Size |
Equivalent Focal Length |
Aperture |
Screen |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Huawei Pura 70 Ultra |
13.1 x 9.8 mm |
24.5 mm |
f/1.6 |
2844 x 1260 pixels |
Here, all parameters have been optimized for night performance with an f/1.6 aperture and a 1-inch type sensor measuring 13.1 x 9.8 mm. For reference, on digital compacts, the aperture is at best f/1.8, as seen in the Canon G7 X III and Sony RX100 VA.
Another major advantage is the photo app, which offers all necessary settings in its Pro mode. You have access to manual focus, sensitivity, aperture, exposure time, and white balance. Naturally, you can (and should) save images in RAW format. You can shoot in RAW+JPEG, which is convenient, but note that the JPEG files are a bit too smooth.
During our first test session, all images were blurry. On an older model, the app was identical, except that the manual focus dial was on the infinity stop. On the Pura 70 Ultra, this is no longer the case: it can focus beyond infinity. An additional difficulty in Pro mode is that if you zoom in on the image, it switches directly to the telephoto lens. Therefore, you have to focus based on what you see on the screen at 1x.
The positive aspect is that in live view, the brightest stars are relatively well visible. If you closely observe the screen, you’ll notice a focus zone where the number of visible stars multiplies. You need to set to this adjustment and possibly test a few points before and after this point. It’s tedious, but once the focus distance is found, it will be valid for all your shots.
The manual mode allows for exposures up to 30 seconds. And here, surprisingly, the Milky Way is visible, and you even capture details in the foreground, illuminated only by starlight! Upon closer examination, the raw file (RAW) is raw in name only. The device performs noise reduction on the image—particularly noticeable on stars, which show very little color nuance.
The result is still impressive, and this smartphone proves to be the most capable at night among those tested.
Note that Huawei is affected by tensions between China and the United States and does not have Google services natively. For a few months now, there has been a workaround by installing the Gspace or Gbox app from the Huawei AppGallery, which allows installing Google Play. This smartphone model is therefore aimed at the more tech-savvy among us.
Apple iPhone 15 Pro: A Nighttime App in Need of Improvement
| |
Sensor Size |
Equivalent Focal Length |
Aperture |
Screen |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| iPhone 15 Pro |
9,8 x 7,4 mm |
24 mm |
f/1,78 |
2556 x 1779 pixels |
Apple's iPhone 15 has marked a turning point in imaging with its impressive video capabilities. For night photography, it is not the best-equipped in our test panel, but it performs better than most entry- and mid-range smartphones.
There is no manual mode in the native app (Camera), so we installed Astroshader (free) to try to work around this limitation. Unfortunately, it performs very poorly. If you request a 30-second exposure, the app will stack 30 exposures of 1 second each… The result is far from satisfactory, as shown in the image below.
After some research, we found that a Night mode does exist in the native app, but it is not always available; the phone needs to be in darkness. When this mode is active, a “night” icon appears at the top left, and the app automatically estimates the exposure time.
In reality, if you click on the arrow icon at the top of the image, more options become available, allowing you to choose a longer exposure time, up to a maximum of 10 seconds. However, if you mount the iPhone 15 Pro on a tripod, the limit extends to 30 seconds. The principle remains the same as in Astroshader: the smartphone stacks 1-second photos and corrects for vibrations if the shot is taken handheld.
Photos are saved in the HEIC format, a proprietary compressed format, but less destructive than JPEG. We would have preferred to have the option of a true RAW format. Nevertheless, the result is quite impressive given the method used and significantly better than with Astroshader. Star movement is compensated, but the image quality remains inferior to competitors, with some stars at the edge of the field appearing distorted.
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra: The Underdog
| |
Sensor Size |
Equivalent Focal Length |
Aperture |
Screen |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra |
9.6 x 7.2 mm |
23 mm |
f/1.7 |
3120 x 1140 pixels |
The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra should not be confused with the S24 and S24+. The main camera module is indeed different. Its most surprising feature is its 200-megapixel sensor. While not entirely new (it was first introduced on the Galaxy S23 Ultra), it features 0.6 µm pixels which may seem problematic. However, the sensor is designed to be used in 50-megapixel mode during the day and 12-megapixel mode at night. It employs a 4x4 binning technique, creating a “superpixel” from 16 smaller pixels. Let’s see if this unconventional architecture proves effective.
The built-in camera app is adequate for nighttime photography. It includes a Pro mode where you can adjust sensitivity, exposure time, and white balance, as well as manual focus. The challenge is that the image appears black with only a few stars visible. Moreover, the original app does not allow for zooming to ensure precise focus. In the absence of this feature, the best method is to focus on a distant object (beyond a few dozen meters, which is effectively infinity for a lens of this size).
On-screen, the focus peaking, displayed in green, helps find the correct focus. Notably, the screen’s impressive resolution of 3120 x 1140 pixels aids in this process. The image quality is good, with star colors visible, and the raw files have not been altered by internal processing. Additionally, some red nebulae are visible, which is generally a weak point in most cameras. While you can shoot in JPEG+RAW, the JPEG files are unusable due to excessive smoothing. Similarly, using Night mode results in a 20-second exposure, but the final image is largely unusable due to severe noise reduction.
The final image clearly shows the Milky Way. Despite its pixel density, the sensor is capable of performing well in night conditions. This is a pleasant surprise, with notable fidelity in star colors. The RAW files provided in DNG format (the most standard) appear to be minimally processed by the smartphone. Therefore, you get a good base material if you are willing to perform post-processing on a computer with Sequator software.
Google Pixel 8 Pro: Designed for Astronomy:
| |
Sensor Size |
Equivalent Focal Length |
Aperture |
Screen |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Google Pixel 8 Pro |
9.8 x 7.4 mm |
25 mm |
f/1.68 |
2992 x 1344 pixels |
The subsequent exposure starts with a countdown of just over 4 minutes. During this time, the camera takes 15 photos with 16-second exposures. The 16-second limit is intended to freeze the stars. If the exposure is longer, the apparent movement of the stars becomes visible with an equivalent focal length of 25 mm. The main advantage of the dedicated mode is that it merges the 15 photos, correcting for star movement without affecting the foreground.
Such processing can be done with Sequator software on a computer, but it's convenient to have it done at the time of shooting! Without a doubt, the final result is high-quality and impressive. Both the RAW and JPEG files are of excellent quality. The only drawback of this mode (if we must find one) is the 4-minute wait to see the result. This delay can be a bit long for checking the framing, for example. For manual photos, the Deep Sky Camera app can be used, which allows zooming in to focus on a bright star. However, the maximum single exposure time in this mode is also limited to 16 seconds.
Conclusion:
We achieved good results with three of the tested smartphones. The Huawei Pura 70 Ultra stands out as the most sensitive. The Google Pixel 8 Pro impressed with its dedicated astrophotography feature, which is both simple and effective. We appreciated the integrity of the RAW files on the Samsung, which provided beautiful color nuances. On the Apple side, the results were less impressive. Its night shooting mode works very well in cityscapes but shows its limitations in astronomy.
By scaling the same area of the sky, we can compare the performance of the different smartphones. They tend to perform as well as or even better than a digital compact with a comparable sensor size (Sony RX100 V). However, a full-frame mirrorless camera (such as the Sony Alpha 7 III here) remains superior.
All these devices share a common drawback: their equivalent focal length is close to 24 mm. For night landscape photography, shorter focal lengths of 12 to 16 mm are more suitable. Therefore, in this domain, interchangeable lens cameras remain the most effective,