Samsung’s Galaxy Note 20 Ultra DxOMark finished 10th with 121 points.

Samsung’s Galaxy flagship has always been one of the benchmarks for taking pictures of Android phones, but the country’s mobile phones have improved so much in recent years that Samsung has been unable to keep up with domestic brands such as Huawei and Xiaomi on the DXOMark rating. On October 5th, DxOMark announced samsung’s Galaxy Note 20 Ultra DxO photo rating, which came in 10th place with 121 points, even lower than earlier Samsung’s Galaxy S20 Ultra.

DXOMark considers the Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Ultra to be an extremely image-capable smartphone. It has good exposure, detail and vivid color, but the main problem is the zoom ability of near and medium distance, which affects the overall performance.

Samsung's Galaxy Note 20 Ultra DxOMark finished 10th with 121 points.

DXOMark also pointed out that samsung’s Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G’s new shooting features were hyped up, but the results were slightly disappointing. As a result, Samsung engineers adjusted the Galaxy Note 20 Ultra 5G camera combination, selected different sensors and lens specifications for the remote camera, and discarded the TOF sensor for the take-out.

In most cases, samsung’s Galaxy Note 20 Ultra 5G image quality is excellent, Samsung’s high-end models are exposed, detailed, bright colors, Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Ultra 5G is no exception. However, the main problem is the zoom capability of the near and medium range, which affects the overall performance and ranks 10th.

Samsung's Galaxy Note 20 Ultra DxOMark finished 10th with 121 points.

Photo Benefits:

Vibrant and pleasing colors, accurate exposure, wide dynamic range, good level of detail, accurate exposure and white balance under ultra-wide angle shooting,

Ultra-wide-angle photography with accurate exposure and white balance, very low-light night scene exposure and color, high levels of image detail under the flash.

Not enough photos:

Low-light noise is obvious, white balance is not accurate under some laboratory conditions, autofocus is unstable under laboratory conditions, and the fusion of artifacts is severe when shooting at mid-close zoom, and significant noise and artifacts are captured at long wide angles.

Video benefits:

In most cases, target exposure is accurate, dynamic range is wide, indoor and outdoor textures and noise are balanced, overall colors are vivid and pleasing, static handheld video is good at stabilization, and autofocus is fast.

Insufficient video:

In most cases, autofocus is unstable, texture and noise balance is poor in low light, indoor and outdoor white balance offsets are significant, and sometimes obvious color quantification, overlapping, molar, and cyan bias.