←back to thread

Google Pixel 10 series review

(arstechnica.com)
69 points thunderbong | 1 comments | 30 Aug 25 09:05 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
wg0 ◴[02 Sep 25 23:01 UTC] No.45110245[source]▶
Why in the world I would buy a phone (any not just Google) that costs north of $800 is beyond me unless I want to signal my purchasing power. If utility is my metric and not outward signalling and flex, I find this worst deployment of my funds.

So called "budget" phones these days have OLED screens some even come with 120Hz displays (beyond me why someone would want that) and plenty of compute and memory.

You want camera, buy a camera. You want gaming, buy a console or gaming machine.

replies(7): >>45110265 #>>45110269 #>>45110274 #>>45110337 #>>45110393 #>>45110621 #>>45119925 #
1. sho_hn ◴[02 Sep 25 23:06 UTC] No.45110274[source]▶
For me it was "want camera", and I chose the top SKU (P8 Pro) because I wanted maximum camera.

"Buy a camera" doesn't work because (a) I don't want to pocket two devices, (b) most point-and-shoot dedicated cameras that are actually better are more bulky, too, (c) even entry-level good digital cameras are >$500 (e.g. a ZV-1F or something), so even the combo with a midrange phone often comes out more expensive and (d) a seperate camera makes it really annoying to send photos anywhere on the go.

That said: I came away fairly unhappy with the Pixel 8 Pro camera, which my book has a too editorialized post-processing look that I simply don't like. In retrospect, I think I should have gone for the Xperia in that generation, which appears to have been the last phone with high-end smartphone camera gear that took neutral-looking shots. My S21, despite having a worse sensor and optics, took subjectively nicer photos.

I've now updated my definition of "maximum phone camera" to be more choosy ...