It is a known fact that dxomark resource is a complete sellout and very prone to assign fake rankings. And no one in sane condition will use their results as a reference, because of their prepaid nature. dxomark’s cool conclusion of the past that iphone is better then [Nokia PureView 808] in terms of detail, makes me laugh till today.

Days go by and it looks like we have another “winner” here – [dpreview] , to be precise. I used it from the very beginning [early 2000s]. Always refereed to their website as trustworthy source of news. But today’s discovery made me stunned. Just look at [this atrociously fake camera-phone rating] . Check the best smartphone camera section.

To get the real rating just multiple results by “-1”. And you’ll get the following picture:

  1. [Sony Pro-I] [1”, but considering the fact that less than 65% of sensor square is used, count it as ~ 1/1.28”-1/1.3” Yeaah! They’ve almost managed to reach 2011 camera-phone Nokia 808 in terms of sensor size. We should celebrate this stunning fact, for sure!]
  2. [google pixel 6 pro] [1/1.31”]
  3. [samsung s21 ultra] [1/1.33”]
  4. [iphone 13] [sensor size is unknown, surprised? I’m not]

Sony Pro-I has the biggest sensor, pathetic iphone just simply doesn’t have any reference regarding it’s sensor size even on comprehensive gsmarena. Even Sony is trying to hide stuff with cheap marketing techniques, but at least they are lookin’ not so greyishly dull comparing to “com-petition”.

If you look closely to recent news you see constant mumbling regarding apple: apple this, apple that. So it is pretty eveident that dp bureau is on apple’s salary.

Oh, and those tremendously useless news regarding [200Mpix sensors] . Why? Why such density is needed when manufacturers are using cheap plastic “lenses”? And the real bottleneck will be these co-called lenses, but not a pixel count. Oh God, I can’t stand this. So, megapixels are just meaningless numbers, nothing else. Also, pay attention to the fact that such pixel density even when exploiting 1/1.33” sensor will produce loads of digital noise. Aha! That’s why we need digital post-processing, which is still producing water-colour washed out paintings instead of real picture, but such material feed helps to sell newer and faster chips. Progress looks quite fake. Don’t you think so?

So, manufacturers want to sell utter junk to masses and mask real characteristics of hardware. But who is the target audience?

1] Shocker news from Slashdot regarding elementary school and delaying algebra to 9th grade answer the previous question completely.
2] [Termination of advanced tech forums] by big corps.

See the pattern? Yeaah….Damn right.


I have come to conclusion that they want to push mediocre products to a slow people. Looks like a good plan. Ok, i’m out, at least for today.
Keep your brains frosty and don’t absorb all mainstream news as real ones and then you’ll be in the safe area by a margin.

PS. In upcoming future will do quick side-by-side comparison between Nokia PureView 808 and Sony Pro-I, so stay tuned!