We here at DPReview aren’t immune from falling into time-worn debates. When discussing the upcoming iPhone Fold, which, if the rumors are to be believed, will only feature two cameras, I made a comment about how I was annoyed that, when phone manufacturers choose to drop a camera from the ultrawide-wide-telephoto trio included on most flagships, it’s the long option that always gets the axe. If I can only have one (a choice I don’t think I should even have to consider for a phone rumored to be over $2000, but whatever), I’d prefer it to be the telephoto.

My colleague Dale Baskin, however, disagreed, saying he’d prefer to keep the ultrawide. And, surveying the the market, it seems like a lot of people, or at least phone manufacturers, agree with him. So I figured I’d put forward my argument for why the telephoto should be raised above the ultrawide… and then begrudgingly give the latter its due as well.

Go long

Mitchell Clark

Before we start, I want to note that I’m coming to this with data: I’ve owned two phones that have all three focal lengths on them – an iPhone 11 Pro and an iPhone 15 Pro – and in-between I owned an iPhone 12 Mini, which just has a wide and ultrawide. Barely a day went by that I didn’t miss the that telephoto option and, now that I have it again, I use it more than the 0.5x option. Of the 7000 pictures I’ve taken with my phone, around 830 of them were taken with the telephoto, versus around 750 with the ultrawide. (It’s admittedly a much smaller gap than I expected, though if I narrow it down to my favorites, it’s no competition; the tele wins 5:1). 

To me, that’s for a very simple reason: I run into more scenarios where I can’t get closer than ones where I can’t get further away. Almost certainly, this will come down to my shooting style. Looking at the ultrawide photos I’ve taken, it’s pretty much exactly what you’d expect: interior shots, landscapes, photos of large objects that I didn’t feel like stepping back from and pictures of my cat where I’ve made him look goofy by getting the camera really close to him. Except for the latter, they’re all shots I probably could’ve replicated relatively closely using my phone’s main camera and a bit more effort. 

Mitchell Clark

That’s not the case for the 4x telephoto shots. Those are comprised of pictures at concerts where the artist was far away, wildlife shots, portraits or product shots where I wanted background compression, odd things I saw off in the distance and, again, pictures of my cat being goofy, but in a way where I suspect he’d stop if I got up to get a closer picture. Sure, there are a few where I could’ve just zoomed with my feet, but they’re honestly in the minority.

This has become even more true as Apple has continued to increase the reach of its telephoto cameras. What was once something like a 50mm equiv. has become a 100mm equiv., which genuinely gives you the option to take pictures of things that are too far away for your standard camera.

Go wide

Mitchell Clark

There are, of course, reasons to prefer an ultrawide to a telephoto. Wider focal lengths are almost required for many forms of photography, like architecture, wide-field astrophotography (not that the iPhone has a great astro mode, but some Android models do) and more. And just like there will be times when you can’t get closer to something, there will be times when you actually can’t get far enough back to take the photo you want with a normal lens.

But while I can understand why you’d want an ultrawide, I’m also clearly biased (see the previous section). So I’ll hand it over to Dale to talk about why he would pick them over a telephoto.

Dale’s thoughts

My own preference for ultrawides likely comes down to my shooting style. I like to get close to things. To me, a subject photographed close-up offers a perspective that’s more intimate and personal than one shot from farther away. It puts you closer to the story and can immerse you in it, rather than placing distance between you and the subject. That doesn’t mean I don’t like or use telephoto lenses, and I’d be lying if I said I never used the one on my smartphone, but if I had to choose between the two, I’d go with my storytelling tool: the ultrawide.

Maybe I’m the outlier here. After all, I’m the guy who picked an altrawide lens as my DPReview gear of the year not once, not twice, not thrice, but four times, so I clearly have a bias. But I also know that when I show a friend or family member how to use their ultrawide lens to get a more dramatic landscape shot, they discover a new way of seeing that expands their photographic repertoire. And they love to use it.

And I can certainly appreciate why some people would prefer a telephoto option; there really are times when you just want to zoom in on something, whether it’s one of your kids playing sports or to shoot a portrait.

Mitchell Clark

Beyond the general photographic reasons, the iPhone utilizes the ultrawide in extra features in a way that it doesn’t for the telephoto. For the past few years, Apple has been using the camera to provide a “macro mode” that lets you take pictures of very close-up objects. It also uses it for “desk view” if you’re using your phone as a webcam. Finally, it has some computational purposes too; if you’re taking a “Spatial” photo that will render using depth data in VR, the phone uses the wide and the ultrawide camera to get its dual perspectives on the scene (though it’s possible that’s mainly because it’s the camera that most iPhones will have). 

You can’t always get what you want

As I alluded to before, I realize that my preference for telephoto lenses probably isn’t widely held. When Samsung was deciding which cameras to put on the Galaxy Z Flip and passport-shaped Galaxy Z Fold8, it went with the wide and ultrawide, same as it had done with the ultra-thin S25 Edge. Apple does the same for the baseline iPhone series, and that was true for Google as well, before it decided it was better to have three mediocre cameras than two that were pretty good. And while I haven’t seen the market research that says the people at large prefer ultrawides, I’m certain it exists; otherwise, dual-camera phones that pair a wide and a telephoto wouldn’t be as rare as they are.

Samsung

Part of that likely comes down to marketing. With most phones, you can at least somewhat approximate having a telephoto lens by zooming in. Phone manufacturers even make it easy to do, and say that even phones with a single camera actually have a zoom option with “optical quality.” I think they’re wrong, but when has that ever stopped marketers? And yet its true that you can’t even really approximate the effects of an ultrawide lens, nor can you use software to emulate the close-up shooting you can do with them like you can to telephotos with portrait mode.

Dale also pointed out that it may simply be easier and/or cheaper for manufacturers to build ultrawide lenses than telephoto ones, reducing costs while still allowing them to market their phones as having two cameras. And, indeed, I have to wonder if that’s part of the reason why folding phones, which have to fit their cameras into a much slimmer profile than normal, often compromise on the telephoto. It’s possible there’s just not enough room for the more ambitious lenses.

Is it a dealbreaker?

Whatever arguments there are for including an ultrawide to the exclusion of the telephoto, the strongest one is this: I, and I suspect many others like me who prefer the latter, will still buy a phone that doesn’t have the camera layout we want. That could be for many reasons; maybe you want to save money by not going with a higher-end model, or maybe (like I’ve done in the past and likely will do again in the future) you simply prefer the form factor of the phone that doesn’t have the complete suite. But even if I buy the iPhone Fold and love it, I know that, in the back of my mind, I’ll always miss that extra reach when I open the camera app.

Earlier this week, Xiaomi announced the Poco F9 Ultra, the latest entry in its lineup of phones that started as “flagship killers”; devices with specs similar to top-of-the-line models, but with substantially lower price tags. It’s the first in its series to include a 200MP main camera and let you shoot at that resolution, but it also starts at €1099, which is less flagship killer and more just… regular flagship. While it might’ve been easy to forgive lackluster cameras on the 2020 F2 Pro given its €499 price tag, and perhaps even with its predecessor, the €830 F8 Ultra, the F9 Ultra is now in the realms of phones like the Pixel 11 Pro and the standard iPhone 17.

So how does it stack up? Well, what you want out of your phone’s photos will depend a lot on your preferences; what kind of colors you like, what lens options you want, etc. The Poco F9 Ultra offers three: a 0.7x ultra-wide, a standard wide that’s around 24mm equiv. (though you can configure it to add a little digital crop by default if you prefer 28 or 35mm equiv.), and a 5x telephoto zoom. It also has center crop modes for the main and telephoto cameras to provide “2x” and “10x” options, though these only use a quarter of the sensor, so you’re giving up quite a bit when it comes to image quality.

We’ll let you take a look through our sample gallery to see if the pictures the phone produces match your tastes and expectations for a phone at this price point.. We’ve made sure to use all three of its cameras, both in their standard 12.5MP outputs, as well as their 50MP modes (and 200MP mode for the main 24mm equiv. module), and to shoot in a variety of conditions, from sunny days to low light situations. Once you’re done looking, I’ll suggest comparing it against our recent Pixel 11 Pro gallery as a benchmark.

Of course, if you want my opinion, I’m happy to give it. Overall, I think it’s fine, but it’s probably not the phone I’d choose if its performance as a camera were important to me. Foundationally, I find its mix of cameras to be a bit… odd. A 24mm equiv. is perfect for a main camera, but the ultrawide option only going out to 17mm equiv. leaves it still feeling a bit cramped; I think there’s a reason most phones go with 0.5x rather than 0.7x.

Likewise, while a “5x” 120mm equiv. has become relatively standard – it’s close to what Apple and Google use for their telephoto options – I’ve always found it a bit of an unhappy medium; too tight for most casual shooting situations, while not providing as much reach as the “10x,” ~220mm equiv. options included on some other Android phones. I’d probably prefer something closer to 80mm equiv., or, if I’m dreaming, 50mm equiv. with a fourth camera for longer zoom (though even at €1100, that’s probably asking for too much).

Mitchell Clark

As for the software side of things, I’ve found it tends to overexpose things a bit much for my tastes. And while I find the colors to be more saturated than I like, I’m more annoyed by the fact that they change quite noticeably when you switch between cameras. The 200MP mode definitely provides more detail than the default 12.5MP mode when there’s plenty of light, but I think it also highlights that the lens isn’t the sharpest once you start getting to the edges.

I have fewer complaints from a usability standpoint. My personal phone is an iPhone 15 Pro and Xiaomi has clearly taken… inspiration from Apple when designing its camera app, so I found it very easy to navigate. The Poco offers several more options, though, including a Pro mode that gives you manual exposure and focus control, which can be useful in those situations where you just can’t get the phone to do what you want (though I thankfully found that I could typically get something I was happy with just using exposure compensation). It also has a frankly ludicrous number of face-tuning options for selfies, if you’re into that kind of thing; I tried taking one with all the sliders, which include options like “slender,” “head size”, “big eyes,” “hairline” and “teeth” set all the way to max and the results were, well… See for yourself.

Ultimately, though, if you’re looking to purchase this phone, it’s up to you whether you’re happy with the photos for the price Xiaomi is asking. Hopefully the sample gallery below will help you decide.

Sample gallery

Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter/magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing; we do so in good faith, so please don’t abuse it. 

Here’s a refreshing bit of news: there’s at least one camera company out there whose products are getting appreciably cheaper. Today, cinema company Blackmagic Design announced that it’s slashing the prices of its full-frame Cinema Camera 6K and Pyxis 6K models by over $1000, something it says it can do after “securing better pricing on parts.”

Neither camera is particularly new: the Cinema Camera was announced in 2023, and the Pyxis in 2024. So it’s not surprising that Blackmagic is able to make them for less than it initially was. What I wouldn’t typically expect is the company passing those savings on to its customers, given our age of prices rising due to AI-driven chip scarcity and inflation. 

It’s also not a situation where Blackmagic raised prices due to tariffs in the US, and is lowering them back down now that they’re gone. It did raise prices – the Cinema Camera 6K launched for $2595 – but the new prices are well below what the cameras were originally announced at.

Realistically, I realize most of our audience won’t be interested in dedicated cinema cameras in an age when the best hybrid mirrorless models excel in both video and stills, no matter how inexpensive they are. But I’d like to think this is a sign that things might be changing in the camera world. While it may be too much to hope that we’ll see new models that are cheaper than their predecessors, or similar price reductions for existing cameras – I suspect the bigger, more established companies are already getting parts for as cheaply as they can, and Blackmagic is just moving up towards that level of economy of scale – perhaps we’ll at least see some cameras that aren’t substantially more expensive than their predecessors.

GoPro’s merger with Starman Optical doesn’t mean the company will stop making action cameras, according to a letter from the action cam company’s CEO, Nick Woodman. Earlier this week he said the company planned to address “important areas of national security related to cameras, optics and AI infrastructure,” but now tells the GoPro community that he expects the merger to “make GoPro a stronger, more capable camera company than ever before.”

If you missed the merger announcement earlier this week, that statement may seem unnecessary; of course GoPro would keep making cameras, that’s the main thing it does. But its consumer-facing business didn’t get much attention in its merger announcement, with the company talking more about expanding into “AI data center, government, defense and aerospace markets.” It did promise to “continue to fully support its existing consumer products and its subscription and cloud platform,” but the word “existing” made some (myself included) wonder how much work it’d put into future consumer cameras.

In his new letter, Woodman says the company’s “improved financial strength” after the merger, planned for later this year, pending regulatory approval, will put the company in “a much better position to innovate, invent and advance the future of consumer and professional content creation.” He also says that Starman is passionate about the GoPro brand, too.

“We plan to bring you more innovative cameras, smarter accessories, and more powerful software and services designed to make capturing, editing and sharing your experiences easier and more exciting than ever,” he says later in the letter.

Personally, I’m glad to hear this, as I think GoPro is an important competitor in the action camera space, even if it’s struggled to keep up with the pace set by other companies like DJI and Insta360 in recent years. Of course, there’s a storied history of companies and executives making promises about what things will be like post-merger, with the reality ending up very different. But for now, it sounds like GoPro plans to continue working on cameras alongside bringing manufacturing of optics and transceivers to the US and breaking into the defense market.  

When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.

Leica has announced the Summicron-M 66 F2, which it says is a “reinterpretation” of one of the rarest M-mount lenses ever made: the Elcan 66mm F2, which was specially designed for the US Navy’s use in “covert reconnaissance photography.”

According to Leica’s press release, there were only around 200 copies of the original lens, designed by Dr Walter Mandler of Ernst Leitz Canada in the late 1960s, ever made. Its spy-centered origins also explain the odd focal length; it was designed to balance providing maximum resolution and contrast, without being too big. It’s not hard to imagine why the US Navy and its allies would want that in the midst of the Cold War.

Leica

The new lens contains several references to its lineage. Leica says the aperture ring turns in the opposite direction from a typical M-lens – you twist it left to stop down, instead of right – and the distance scale is military-spec. It will also be a limited edition; the company is producing 660 of them, which will have their serial number engraved on the front ring. The first lens, 001, will be auctioned.

Optically, the lens has 6 elements in 5 groups, and can focus on subjects as close as 1m (3′ 3″) away. It has a 9-bladed aperture. Leica says that, at F2, it will have “distinctive rendering” with “soft bokeh and high contrast,” while providing “maximum resolution” when stopped down. You can see some samples taken by Mike Chudley and provided by Leica below, though it’s hard to critically examine a lens’s performance based on JPEGs that have gone through an unknown editing process. Thankfully, Leica has also provided MTF charts.

Leica

The lens weights 456g (16.1oz), and is around 60mm (2.4″) long. It has a 49mm filter thread and, unlike some other premium Leica lenses, has a screw-on hood, rather than an integrated one.

This isn’t the first reinterpretation of the lens that we’ve seen. Leica’s movie-focused sister company, Leitz Cine, sells the Hugo 66mm T2.1, which is also based on the Elcan. However, that lens is designed for PL and L mount, is much larger and has geared focus and aperture rings designed to make life easier on a movie set.

Leica says the Summicron-M 66 F2 will be available starting September 3 for $10,900. While that’s a hefty sum for an F2 lens, even by Leica standards, it’s a pittance for what you’d pay for one of the originals, assuming you were even able to find one (which is apparently no small task). One went up for auction in 2020, with a starting price of €40,000, though it ended up going unsold. Similarly, every listing of the cine version of the lens that I found had a “Contact Us” button instead of a price, essentially saying that if you have to ask, you can’t afford it. 

Manufacturer Samples

Leica

Leica Summicron-M 66 F2

Specifications

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

GoPro has announced that it’s entered into a “definitive merger agreement” with Starman Optical, a little-known entity described in the press release as a “privately held optical-photonics company.” According to current GoPro CEO Nick Woodman, the company hopes the move will help it “grow across consumer, commercial and defense markets,” and address “important areas of national security related to cameras, optics and AI infrastructure.”

This is, to put it mildly, a bit of a pivot from its current role as an action camera company. A few hints suggest that the action camera business may not be going away, though. For one, GoPro promises it will “continue to fully support its existing consumer products and its subscription and cloud platform.” While that’s good news for anyone who just bought the Mission 1 Pro ILS, released just a week before this news broke, the word “existing” casts a bit of doubt on whether we’ll see new consumer cameras from the company in the future. 

There are a few references to the company’s “growth potential” in consumer markets, but there’s much heavier emphasis on US national security and manufacturing. GoPro founder and CEO Nick Woodman says the company plans to address “important areas of national security related to cameras, optics and AI infrastructure.” And Charles Tebele, CEO of Starman Holding, says “The combination of GoPro’s world-class optical expertise and intellectual property with Starman’s advanced transceiver capabilities and U.S. manufacturing platform creates a unique opportunity. Together, we intend to bring production of these critical components back to the United States.”

In the US, national security has long been big business, with lucrative military contracts sustaining many companies, even ones better known for their consumer products. But it’s become an increasingly hot-button topic in recent years, with the US government promising billions to companies making semiconductors within its borders, and placing import restrictions on companies like DJI based on perceived threats to national security. The company also promises to expand into the hot and controversial “AI Data Center” space, though to me that reads more as it filling out its bingo card of phrases you’re required to use in a press release in 2026.

As a camera company, GoPro has some share in the military industrial complex – when we interviewed NASA astronaut and US Air Force Col. Terry Virts in 2019, he said Russia beat the US to the punch by flying GoPros into space (though NASA has since included the cameras on multiple flights, including its recent Artemis II mission) – but it’s not exactly a major player. It’s clear its leadership sees the merger as an opportunity to change that, with intents to “leverage its IP, optics and imaging capabilities across defense, government, robotics and aerospace markets, building on demand for U.S.-made solutions.” Woodman reiterates that point, saying: “We’re excited to combine with the Starman team to capitalize on this opportunity and play an important role in America’s future.”

Mitchell Clark

GoPro has been in dire financial straits for a while, following years of Chinese competitors like DJI and Insta360 introducing action cameras that tempted would-be buyers away with innovative features, new form factors and larger sensors, while the Hero line largely stagnated. This year, the company announced the Mission 1 series that largely caught back up with, and in some respects surpassed, those competitors, but it may have been too late. Earlier this summer, it warned investors that there was “substantial doubt” about its ability to continue in business. At the time, it said it was investigating “opportunities within the defense and aerospace sector.” Those investigations were apparently fruitful.

According to the press release, the merger – which will see $285 million paid to GoPro shareholders – will see the company’s $92 million in debt paid off, “resulting in a clean, substantially debt-free balance sheet.” The company will remain publicly listed, though its unclear whether that listing will be for GoPro alone or the newly combined entity; GoPro’s press release promises “additional information regarding the transaction upon closing.”

Finally, there’s the question of who Starman Optical is, and how it has the money to buy GoPro. As best I can tell, it’s a subsidiary of Starman Holding, a company that owns several sub-brands, including popular phone case and accessory companies like Incase and Incipio. While Starman Holding’s website doesn’t list Starman Optical as one of its companies, it does list Starman New Photonics, and its About Us page names Charlie Tebele as its CEO. The websites for both Starman Holding and Starman New Photonics don’t have a ton of information on them, though that’s not that odd for this kind of company.

GoPro expects the deal to close by the end of the year, assuming it’s approved by regulators and GoPro shareholders. 

Camera Intelligence, the company behind the Caira camera that attaches to the back of your iPhone, is adding even more AI features to the device. The app that powers the camera is getting the ability to edit videos shot on it using generative AI, building on a feature that allowed you to make similar adjustments to your photos.

The company says the feature will support a few types of edits: “relighting” footage (making a video shot at noon look like it was taken at golden hour, for instance), reframing it, emulating a camera motion like a tilt or pan and “set extension,” which the company says lets you “extend the world by 10 seconds beyond what was filmed on location.” The options are presented as templates that you can pick from, though there is a chatbot that you can use to give additional input; for example, you can use it to tell the AI that the “orbit” camera move should be centered around a specific person in the shot.

Camera Intelligence

The Caira shoots at up to 4K, though the clips produced by the generative AI are limited to 720 or 1080. The tool can use Google’s Gemini Omni 1.1 Flash model, or Runway’s Aleph 2.0, and gives you the option to select which one you’d like before setting it to work. The company says it takes one to three minutes to produce a finished video.

Camera Intelligence stresses that the tool can only be used to edit existing footage that you took with the camera, not create something entirely new. It’ll keep your original footage, and the generated file will have a Google SynthID watermark. The company says it started work on the feature after surveying 111 Kickstarter backers* and hearing from 77% of them that they’d like the feature. 

In a press release, it says the feature is designed for “solo creators and marketers who may not have the budget to commission this work and who are often overwhelmed by pro editing tools – but who are excited by these technologies and what they make possible.”

Generating video, like generating images, isn’t particularly cheap. The company says the feature will be available “alongside Generative Image Editing and a yet-to-be-announced feature” as part of Caira Studio, which is launching later this year. Pricing hasn’t been announced yet, but the company has made it clear from the start that generative editing features would require a subscription. The Kickstarter page promised that the “Caira Pro” plan would be $7 a month, but that only included stills editing.

Camera Intelligence says the generative video editing feature will only be available in the US and UK.

Watching the samples that Camera Intelligence included in its announcement video, I understand why the company is pitching this as a prototyping tool – something you can use to see if a shot will work before actually trying to capture it – rather than something you’d use to produce final footage. While the company says the Omni model is “physics-aware and remembers the scene across an entire clip,” if you look close you can definitely still see some AI artifacting. 

Even if the model produced perfect footage, this still isn’t the kind of tool I’d like to use. But it doesn’t surprise me that the people who initially backed the camera based on the pitch of its AI capabilities are interested in it, and it seems like a natural extension of the work Camera Intelligence was already doing. I’m just not sure this feature will entice anyone else to buy the Caira if they weren’t already sold, or demand that the traditional camera makers start building something similar. 

* Speaking of those backers, the company says it’s “delivered the majority of Kickstarter units” of the Caira and is delivering the outstanding ones on a monthly basis.

Experimenting with “recipes” that build on Fujifilm’s “Film Simulations” to change the look of your JPEGs – subtly or not so much – has long been a tradition among a certain set of the company’s users. However, actually getting the recipes to your camera has historically been a bit of a pain, requiring you to manually adjust several parameters and save them to a custom profile that you can later recall. Recent cameras from Fujifilm have somewhat improved the experience with a dedicated recipe system, but it’s still a lot of manual data entry.

This month, though, two apps have promised to solve that problem. One from a major player in the Fujifilm recipes field, the other from a scrappy upstart. For both, recipe syncing is only available for iOS devices (there currently isn’t even an Android version of the latter), but are signs of exciting things to come.

Fuji X Weekly

Mitchell Clark

The first is the Fuji X Weekly app, which is an extension of the popular website that hosts many community created recipes. The app has been around for a while, letting you browse and save recipes that you’d then have to manually enter in on your camera. Now, though, it’s able to download recipes, and then sync them to your camera via a standard called Picture Transfer Protocol. You can do this using the hundreds of recipes in the site’s repository, or with custom ones you’ve entered yourself. 

The process is relatively simple, as it is for the rest of the apps we’ll cover today. You put your camera in USB Raw Conv. / Backup Restore mode, then connect it to your phone with a USB cable. From there, the app should be able to send your selected recipe to whichever custom slot you choose, though the first time you go through this process, you may need to give the app system-level permission to talk to an attached camera. Then, you can select the custom setting mode from your camera (which, in my testing, helpfully already had the name of the recipe in the name field) and start shooting.

Mitchell Clark

While the app is free to use, there is a $20/year subscription that unlocks a few extra features. That list now includes the ability to sync sets of recipes to your camera, rather than having to do them one at a time. Say, for example, you have five recipes you use around town every day, and six that you like to have access to while traveling. Paid members could switch between the two with a press of a button.

FujiShare

Mitchell Clark

A newcomer to the scene is an app called FujiShare, which Reddit user Rude_Shoulder_2895 posted about on the FujifilmX subreddit. They said they built the app to make it easier to load sets of recipes to their X100V. It also aims to give you more information about the example photos used for a recipe, to make it easier to distinguish how much of the aesthetic is down to the camera settings, the recipe and the scene. The app also has tools built in to let you load a JPEG from a Fujifilm camera and save the recipe that was used to make it, and to apply frame effects to your photo, making it look like it’s matted or on a film reel.

FujiShare is a sleek app with a modern UI, and it’s undeniably nice to scroll through the recipes on offer, though there seem to be far fewer than on Fuji X Weekly. Otherwise, the actual process of syncing your recipes is much the same as it is using the other app, though users can post packs of recipes as well, letting you just save an entire set of recipes at once, before sending it off to your camera. On that note, FujiShare’s ability to send over multiple recipes at once currently isn’t pay-gated.

Mitchell

The FujiShare app is currently in public beta, and being distributed through Apple’s TestFlight system, which will take a bit of setup if you haven’t used it before. The beta is free, but it’s unclear what, if any, monetization scheme the app will use when it launches.

Is this new?

Mitchell Clark

One thing worth noting about these apps is that they don’t appear to be the first to come up with the idea. About a year ago, the team behind the FujiStyle app announced a very similar feature, letting you sync recipes to your camera’s custom settings slots via USB. It works very similarly to the other apps and, perhaps most excitingly, I’ve confirmed it works with Android. (I did, however, have to dive into the phone’s developer settings to get it working; your mileage will vary depending on what version of the OS you have.) Unlike the other apps, it doesn’t appear to support syncing sets of recipes at a time, but I bet I could sync seven recipes using the app faster than I could input one on the camera manually.

The caveats

Since these apps all seem to use a similar system to sync recipes, they share a lot of the same warnings and asterisks. The biggest one is made explicit by Fuji X Weekly. In the blog post announcing the feature, Ritchie Roesch says: “While there’s not a lot that can go wrong with PTP, there is a minor chance of adverse affects, especially if not handled carefully by the developers.” While Roesch says they tested many ways that things could go wrong, and built several safeguards into the app, there is still a risk. 

“Very importantly, connecting your camera to any unofficial, unlicensed, unsupported program may void your camera’s manufacturer warranty,” Roesch says. “Fujifilm confirmed this with me. I tried very hard to obtain a license from Fujifilm so that it wouldn’t risk voiding your warranty, but ultimately that didn’t work out.”

The app also makes this clear when you first go to use the feature, making it clear that you’re doing so at your own risk. While the other apps don’t make the warning as explicit, they come with similar warnings, so it’s probably a good idea to approach all of them with a sense of caution.

It’s also worth noting that these apps aren’t universally compatible. They should work with cameras newer than the X-T3 and X-T30, but those cameras and anything older don’t support the system that these apps use to transfer recipes. Likewise, if you have an older iPhone with a Lightning port, it may not be as simple as using a Lightning-to-USB-C cable; Fuji X Weekly reports those won’t work, but that adapters may. 

Finally, there’s the fact that the recipe-transfer feature is only available on iOS for Fuji X Weekly, and the FujiShare app currently only exists for iOS. Both developers have said they’re working on version for Android, but the timetables are to be determined. That’s unfortunate for Android users in the short term, as it means they have fewer options. Hopefully that situation will improve soon, but in the meantime, the FujiStyle app is there to serve Android users in the meantime.

Summary

Among the DPReview staff, there were two reactions to the news of these apps. The first was “this is great, why hasn’t Fujifilm built this into its own app yet?” The second was “Please don’t ask them to complicate things, I just want the app to transfer pictures reliably, nothing more.” While that reaction is understandable, I also suspect there’s been some pressure on Fujifilm to integrate this kind of feature into XApp. Recipes are a relatively well-known part of its brand identity, and other companies, like Panasonic and Nikon, have beaten it to the punch, building systems that allow users to download community-created color profiles to their cameras using an app (and Ricoh has made mention of doing something similar, too). 

Perhaps the existence of these third party options could take some of that pressure off, letting Fujifilm focus on reliability and compatibility. Or perhaps it’ll build it into XApp at some point in the future and, to borrow a phrase from the Apple developer community, Sherlock these apps. Either way, at the moment Fujifilm users have options they didn’t before.

Fujifilm is strengthening its ties with Google, taking a larger part in the company’s photo printing service. The company announced that it’s taking a “leading” role when it comes to operating and supporting the Google Photos Print Store in the US.

This takes the form of a co-branded store built directly into the Google Photos interface. Once you navigate to the Print Store and select a product to order, you’ll be prompted to connect your Google account to Fujifilm’s services*. From there, Fujifilm will take care of payment, printing, shipping and customer support. Fujifilm also says there are “plans to roll out new features, new products and a more robust user experience.” 

You’ve long been able to get printed products directly from the Google Photos app – I personally have a book I made with the service in 2017 – but the company says this expanded partnership will give users “more ways than ever before to print their memories, including an expanded range of print formats, frames, décor, and gift items, going well beyond the offerings of the previous platform.”

There’s a very good chance that, if you bought prints from Google Photos prior to this announcement, Fujifilm or its equipment were involved in some way. The company is a major player when it comes to photo printing for both consumers and industrial clients. Last year, the company identified “growth in the number of images taken and printing needs due to smartphone proliferation” as one of its key opportunities for mid-to-long-term growth.

While this announcement seems like it’s probably a bigger deal for Fujifilm and Google, rather than the people actually printing their photos, we always appreciate people having better and easier access to printing their photos. While it used to be a vital part of the process, it’s an easy one to forget nowadays, especially if you’re part of the younger generations who have grown up with purely digital photography. It’ll be exciting to see if this partnership makes printing smartphone photos that bit more attractive to the people who may use it to see their images rendered in ink on paper for the first time.

* While Fujifilm’s press release says the platform “began rolling out to Google Photos users in the U.S. at the end of August 2026,” it seems that’s still in progress. When I tried it on September 1st, I ended up in the old Google Photos payment flow. 

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.

Xiaomi has announced the Poco F9 Ultra and the F9 Pro, the latest entries in its series of phones that aim to undercut the pricing of traditional flagship models while offering similar specifications. This time around, the company has included a battery with a massive 8050mAh capacity on the Ultra, and a main camera that can shoot images at up to 200MP on both phones.

That main camera is one of three: the phones also include telephoto and ultrawide options. On the Ultra, the former features a “5x” 120mm equiv. F3 optically stabilized lens and a 50MP sensor. Its ultrawide is a slightly-narrower-than-typical 0.7x 17mm equiv. F2.4 lens, also with a 50MP sensor. Xiaomi doesn’t specify the sizes of these sensors, but they seem to be unchanged from the ones found in the Poco F8 Ultra, which used a Type 1/2.76 (20.4mm²) one for its telephoto and Type 1/2.88 (18.6mm²) for its ultrawide, according to GSMArena. The F9 Pro, meanwhile, has a 50MP 2.5x telephoto camera and an 8MP ultrawide option, again seemingly unchanged from its predecessor.

Xiaomi

The main event, though, is the 200MP wide-angle camera shared by the two models. It has a 24mm equiv. F1.7 stabilized lens. By default, it bins all that resolution down to 12.5MP or 50MP, depending on a setting, but you can access its full resolution via a dedicated mode in the camera app. The pictures take a few seconds to process, and won’t have the HDR effect that you get from the phone’s normal modes, but can show much more detail when shot in ideal conditions; the camera reminds you that the mode works best when there’s plenty of light, for reasons that are obvious if you understand how quad bayer sensors work.

Again, Xiaomi hasn’t said what size sensor its main camera uses, beyond claiming that it uses “2μm 16-in-1 Super Pixels.” That figure shouldn’t be taken literally, though, because to fit 200MP worth of 2μm pixels, you’d need the area of a full frame sensor, which it certainly isn’t. It’s more likely that it’s describing the binned quad bayer pixels, which would put the sensor somewhere around a Type 1/1.56 (50mm²). That would also explain why the company hasn’t advertised the size, when it did for the Poco F8 Ultra, which used a larger Type 1/1.31 (72mm²) sensor for its main camera. We’ve reached out to Xiaomi to ask for specifics, and will update this story if we hear back.

Of course, with flagship cameras the sensor specs aren’t everything, as phones make heavy use of computational photography, stacking multiple frames together. You can see our sample gallery shot using the Poco F9 Ultra below.

Beyond the cameras, the Poco F9 phones have relatively high-end specs. The Ultra uses the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 chip, while the Pro uses the slightly cut-down “V” variant of that system on a chip. Both feature displays capable of going up to 185Hz, and producing 10,000 nits peak brightness, though the latter figure is only over a 1% region of the screen. More realistic is the 4500 nit peak brightness figure, attainable in a window covering 25% of the display. The Ultra’s display is 6.9″, while the Pro’s is 6.59″.

Both phones have relatively large batteries for their size, thanks to the company’s use of silicon-carbon battery chemistry. The Ultra is rated for 8050mAh, while the Pro is 6330mAh. Whichever one you go with, you can recharge it quickly with the correct equipment; they both have 100W wired and 50W wireless charging. What’s more, they can be used to charge other devices that don’t have the same stamina, with 27W of reverse wired charging and 22.5W of reverse wireless charging.

Finally, the phones feature “Sound by Bose” co-branding. On the Ultra, this means stereo speakers combined with a subwoofer that lives alongside the camera modules on the plateau (though the Pro misses out on that feature). Based on the few songs I listened to, it indeed produces pretty impressive bass for a phone. If you go above around 75% volume you’re liable to hear some peaking, but for personal listening that’ll be plenty loud. 

The F9 Ultra comes in “dark cherry” or black, while the Pro is available in black, white or “aurora green,” with the latter literally glowing in the dark after being exposed to light. The Ultra is available with 256GB of storage and 12GB of RAM for $799 / €1,099, or you can upgrade to 16GB of memory with 512GB  or 1TB of storage for $949 / €1199 and $1199 / €1399, respectively. The Pro, meanwhile, starts at €903 for a version of 12GB RAM and 256GB of storage. The launch is global, but, as is typical for Xiaomi phones, excludes the US.

Xiaomi

Xiaomi Poco F9 Ultra

• Shop Now at Xiaomi

Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter/magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing; we do so in good faith, so please don’t abuse it. 

Sigma has announced three new entries to its “Aizu Prime” series of cinema lenses: a 21mm, 100mm and 125mm. Like the rest of the lenses in the series, they’re fast at T1.3, and designed for “large format” cameras, with a 46.3mm image circle that could cover the film in a VistaVision camera or the sensor of an Arri Alexa LF Open Gate. (In photography terms, they’re a touch larger than full frame, which has a 43.3mm diagonal.)

The new lenses take the matched series wider and longer than before. Last year, Sigma launched the Aizu Prime brand with eight lenses, ranging from 25mm to 75mm. It also promised that, eventually, there would be 12 lenses in the series. Today’s announcement brings the total up to 11, with only an 18mm option not yet released.

Sigma

Sigma says the lens’ optical formulas, like the rest of the Aizu Primes, are “developed exclusively for cinema applications,” with an eye towards being sharp, while still retaining character, and having minimal focus breathing and distortion. Sigma also designed them to match the other lenses in the series, sharing similar color, contrast and flare characteristics, sizes and weights (though the 100mm and 125mm are a touch heavier than the rest at 2.2Kg versus 1.6 or 1.7Kg). That’s an important consideration on a busy film set; you don’t want to have to rebalance your gimbal or reset your follow focus and iris control wheels each time you change a lens.

None of this comes cheap, though, as the three new lenses will cost $9799 each, which is a bit of a jump up from the $8300 the rest of the entries in the series cost. That may be a function of their slightly more exotic focal lengths. They’ll be available for PL or Sony E-mount starting in November.

Zack Snyder has directed movies about a lot of things: superheroes, space, ancient Greeks, owls, you name it. With his next film, it seems like we can add photography to that list.

According to the synopsis, the movie, called The Last Photograph, is about a former DEA agent teaming up with a “washed-up junkie war photographer” to try and find his niece and nephew after their parents were murdered. The trailer (and the title) imply that photography will play some role in the story. There are scenes showing a darkroom, photos being taken at a crime scene, a slow-motion shot of a camera exploding, and several moody frames of someone raising a rangefinder to their eye, presumably witnessing horrors off-screen.

Speaking of: we’ll put the trailer below, but heed the warning in the first few seconds. It’s graphic in pretty much every way it can be, including an exceptional amount of violence. Even if you’re fine with that, it’s probably not something to watch at work.

Of course, being a camera site, we were interested in what cameras the characters were using on-screen, especially since Zack Snyder is a known photography buff (he’s reportedly the cinematographer for the movie, too, as he was on 2021’s Army of the Dead, which he shot almost entirely at F0.95 using rehoused vintage optics*). From what we can tell, the photographer character uses Yashica rangefinder – probably an Electro 35CC from the early 70s, based on the markings – and what looks like a Leica M10 Monochrom, a camera Snyder is demonstrably familiar with.

The Yashica isn’t a stranger to the silver screen, either; Andrew Garfield used one in 2012’s The Amazing Spider-Man (back when Spider-Man movies featured the version of Peter Parker who works as a photographer). While the brand wasn’t really known as a go-to for photojournalists, it also wouldn’t be that surprising to hear of a war photographer using a film rangefinder with a fixed 35mm F1.8 lens.

We don’t see a ton of movies about photography, so it’s interesting to be getting a movie from a big-name director that seems to at least feature the art form as an important part of the story. The last film we got like that was Alex Garland’s Civil War, which focused mostly on the role of reporting and war photography (much to people’s surprise, given that it was released during a contentious US election and was set against the backdrop of a fictional second civil war in the country).

Zack Snyder, via TIFF

According to The Hollywood Reporter, it may be a while before we get to see The Last Photograph. It’s set to premiere on September 13 at TIFF (the Toronto International Film Festival), but no one has bought distribution rights to it yet. The film is apparently a passion project for Snyder, who has been kicking the idea around since the mid-2000s. While it certainly seems like it’ll be an intense watch, I’m excited for whenever I do get to see it. In part because of the photography aspect, but also because the cinematography in it looks gorgeous, and it’s always interesting to see a Hollywood director take a big artistic swing.

* The effect is… strange. At times it works and provides a unique aesthetic, at others it borders on distracting. I actually didn’t know about the creative choice when I started watching the movie, but pretty early into it I turned to a friend and said something along the lines of “what is going on with this cinematography?”

Last week, Canon was kind enough to give me the opportunity to attended a Formula Drift event, featuring a high-horsepower competition and a car show with a lot of really interesting vehicles. The shooting experience was highly informative for some upcoming reviews – stay tuned – and I came away with several pictures that I’m really proud of. But I also got something I didn’t expect: a renewed hope for the future of photography.

As a lifelong photographer and someone whose job is writing about cameras, it’s been a bit easy to fret over the future of the artform. Sales of dedicated cameras are recovering, sure, but they’re still far from what they once were. And while phone photography is just as legitimate, the culture at large treats it as cheap and disposable. Even the most meaningful, carefully considered and composed image becomes another piece of content to look at for half a second while scrolling Instagram.

But walking through the car show in the evening, I found myself surrounded by people with cameras, ranging from DSLR kits that could’ve been purchased at Costco to serious pro photography and video rigs. And while the latter were typically used by professionals and content creators (or people hopeful to join those ranks), plenty of others were people who just really liked cars, and who wanted to take cool photos of them to share with their fellow enthusiasts.

I asked one person walking around with a camera what they were taking photos for, and they said it was basically for their personal enjoyment adding with a laugh that they also post to their 200 followers on Instagram. That’s righteous; as someone who’s successfully turned their hobby into a job, I wish I could occasionally just shoot photos for the love of the game like they were.

Mitchell Clark

Even photographing the Formula Drift event itself, the trend held. Several of the people I talked to in the official media pit had started with a love of drift racing, which eventually turned into using photography or video to tell the story of it. Folks there were just as excited about who was winning as they were about the amazing shots they got. That kind of passion is infectious, and they had a lot to teach me. When you start doing photography within a niche, you have a much deeper understanding of what that subculture values, and can push at the edges in a way that a generalist photographer won’t know to.

I suspect there’s actually a pretty strong tie between camera and car culture, and I know that many hobbies have this effect. People will get into something entirely unrelated, want to share it, and discover that the mediums of photo and video are great ways to do it. There’s a storied history of actors, athletes and musicians (yes, including Taylor Swift) picking up photography, and my coworker Abby Ferguson has talked to several photographers with a similar journey in her Behind the Photo series. In it, she showcases people creating amazing work, some of whom started out as VFX artists, cellists or divers. Not everyone who gets into photography tangentially will think of themselves as a photographer, but if they’re out there taking pictures, what else should we call them?

Mitchell Clark

I’ll admit that sometimes it’s easy to get a bit high-and-mighty about photography as an artform, as someone who started doing it for its own sake. This person bought an EOS R5C to take photos? Don’t they know there are so many better options? Those Gen Alpha kids are getting into compacts? Don’t they know about all the downsides, and are they even learning the fundamentals?

Whenever I catch myself thinking things like that, I try to take a step back because that attitude is deeply unhelpful. I should be glad whenever anyone picks up a camera and tries to learn it, and realize that shaming people for not knowing everything – even if they’ve been doing it for decades – is going to hurt the medium, not help it.

So snap on. Whether you’re the most dyed-in-the-wool, capital P Photographer, or whether you just picked up a camera to try and show your friends your latest skateboard trick, finished knitting project, favorite car, or anything else. We’re all doing the same thing here: trying to capture the world as we see it, and share that vision with others.

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

The rumor mill around Apple’s upcoming iPhones, set to be announced September 9, has been in full swing for months, and the word on the street is that there’s supposedly one big change coming to the new phone’s cameras: the iPhone 18 Pro Max will get a variable aperture on its main camera. While people have been making this prediction for years, Bloomberg‘s Mark Gurman, who has a pretty decent track record, recently threw his weight behind it.

As an iPhone nerd, there are a lot of things that interest me about this. The first is that it marks a return of Apple differentiating the camera on its biggest, most expensive* model. The Pro Max phones have historically received new camera updates first – the 15 Pro Max got the 5x telephoto camera a year before it came to the standard Pro – but we’ve been in a stretch where the cameras on the Pro models have been exactly the same. If this rumor is true, that’s about to change.

But as a photographer and camera reviewer, I’m skeptical whether this change will matter much. Before we get to the reasons why, let’s talk about the theoretical benefits. At a high level, changing your lens’s aperture lets you control how much light is hitting the sensor and your depth of field (i.e., how blurry the background of your photo is). The smaller the aperture (or, counter-intuitively, the higher your F-number), the less light it lets in, and the more of your image will be in focus. Phones, historically, have quite fast lenses; the iPhone 17 Pro’s main camera shoots at a fixed F1.78. 

In bright, sunny conditions, this means the phone has to cope with a lot of light hitting the sensor, resorting to tricks like using extremely low ISOs and very fast shutter speeds. And as phone companies push to make their lenses faster to improve image quality and flexibility in low light, this becomes even harder. Adding an aperture that can stop down to, say, F4, would help take some of that pressure off.

Mitchell Clark

It’s worth noting that this would almost certainly be the direction Apple goes in, rather than making one that could open up from F1.78 to, say, F1.2. If it was able to make the lens faster, it already would’ve done so. And for phone photographers, that reduces the potential practical benefits; I’ve personally never run into a situation where it was physically too bright for my phone to cope, so an aperture that can stop down isn’t fixing a problem I currently have (with the one exception of video, where the closer you can get to a shutter speed that’s double your frame rate, the more natural motion will look).

The same is true for the other half of the equation, depth of field. To understand why, we have to introduce the concept of equivalent apertures. A F number is absolute; an F1.8 lens on a phone will transmit the same amount of light per square millimeter of sensor as a full-frame F1.8 will. However, because iPhones use much smaller sensors than traditional cameras, the amount of light gathered over the whole image area and the depth of field won’t be equivalent to what you’d get on a full-frame camera with an F1.8 lens. 

Mitchell Clark

The current iPhone 17 Pro main camera has a Type 1/1.28 (71.5mm²) sensor. That means that its F1.78 lens will produce the same depth of field as an F6.1 lens on a full-frame camera. If Apple makes it stop down to, say F4, that would give you a lens with two settings: F6.1 and F13.7 equiv. That’ll definitely make a difference in your available depth of field, but it’ll be a change from “enough” to “more than enough,” rather than making a huge difference to the types of shots you can get in most cases. It also, importantly, won’t make any difference if you want to get the coveted shallow depth of field look that the iPhone currently has to emulate with portrait mode.

Finally, let’s consider some historical context. Back when compact cameras were dominant, many of them used sensors that were similar sizes to the iPhone, and had the ability to change apertures. But while some had actual aperture blades like a traditional lens, others used a Waterhouse stop, moving a plate with a fixed aperture in between the lens and the sensor to stop down when needed.

This is less flexible – you don’t get the stops in between wide open and the plate’s diaphragm – but is mechanically simpler. That’s likely a huge consideration for Apple when it comes to building a device that will be subjected to pretty much every condition and abuse you can think of. This is, after all, a company that replaced a physical home button with a solid state one (and is rumored to have at least considered doing the same for the rest of the phone’s buttons, too).

DPReview

Some compacts also simply slotted in an ND filter, and reported it as a stopped down aperture, since it had the same effect on the incoming light. (It didn’t affect the depth of field, but, again, they already had plenty). Apple could go either of those routes rather than building a standard aperture, and it would have good reason to; going the traditional way may have reliability concerns, and could cost more at a time when Apple’s also being squeezed when it comes to chip pricing and availability.

With that said, we’ve seen phones with physical aperture mechanisms before. Samsung included the feature on the Galaxy S9 and S10, to extremely middling results. You essentially couldn’t tell the difference, and the company ended up dropping the feature. Huawei has several phones in its lineup today with variable apertures, but it essentially never gets a mention on the feature pages, despite how much of them are dedicated to talking about the cameras.

However Apple decides to implement it, if it does at all, the point is the same: it’s unlikely to be something you actually notice when it comes to the experience of using your phone as a camera or the photos you get out of it. But that’s not to say that Apple has just decided to make one of the most mechanically complex parts of its phones even more complicated for giggles, or that it’ll purely be a marketing gimmick.

To the latter point, I’m honestly 50/50 on whether I think it’ll bring it up in the keynote presentation at all (again, assuming the rumors are even accurate). There’s probably some technical reason why it’ll be nice to have as part of its computational image processing pipeline, and there may even be a slight noticeable benefit to it. And if, by some miracle, Apple has decided to massively increase the size of the camera sensor, then it could genuinely be an important inclusion, though, to be clear, that change hasn’t been rumored at all.

But don’t get your hopes up. At the end of the day, the odds are that iPhone photos will still look like iPhone photos (which is to say: pretty good, for a phone), and that there won’t be an appreciable difference between the camera on the iPhone 18 Pro and the one on the 18 Pro Max… or, for that matter, between the new phone and the one it’s replacing. Sometimes, a change is just a change, no matter how much buzz there is about it leading up to it.

* – Currently most expensive, anyways. Apple is also expected to introduce a folding phone that will almost certainly be priced above the Pro models and that will have worse cameras, if other major foldables are any indication.

Adobe has announced a new collection of features for Photoshop, including one that it promises will let you do the type of processing you’d previously have to go to Adobe Camera Raw to do, without leaving the app’s standard workspace.

The feature is called the “Light Adjustment Layer,” which gives you control over brightness, contrast, and whites, highlight, shadow and black levels. Like other adjustment layers, it’s relatively flexible. You can use masks to have it only apply to certain parts of your image, and it’s non-destructive; unlike filters, you can easily tweak or remove it after you’ve added it. 

Adobe

As with many of the recent features we’ve seen from Adobe, this isn’t necessarily going to unlock new ways of working for Photoshop pros; most of what the layer does could be achieved with Curves and/or Levels adjustment layers. But it makes things that bit easier and friendlier to beginners.

The other major feature in the release takes that even further, introducing a whole new mode to Photoshop that strips away most of the interface. It’s called the ‘AI Assisted Editor’, and it bundles the tools you’d need to do some common and basic tasks into a simpler UI. The company says it’s designed for people who are new to the software and want to use it to make edits, but who might be overwhelmed by trying to figure out which tool to use, and by a layer-based workflow.

Adobe

As the name implies, many of its features revolve around AI. There’s the maximal version, where you just type a prompt into a box with the edits you want made, which Photoshop will try to carry out using a generative model of your choice, but there are also modes that use some of the other AI tools the company’s built into the app. For example, one pane will let you remove the background, and another will let you remove unwanted objects in your image. Yet another gives you access to the Generative Expand feature, which attempts to fill in the area beyond the edges of your image.

Adobe has also introduced other AI tools, such as the ability to have generative edits using its FireFly models only apply to a masked portion of the image, a “markup” mode that lets you guide generative AI edits with drawings and an option in the task bar that lets you type a prompt that will edit the entire image.

Related: Adobe’s new plan to justify its subscriptions: be a one-stop AI shop

Finally, the company has expanded the dynamic text tool, letting you create text that will adapt to a custom shape or path; previously, it only worked with circular, arched or bowed shapes. It’s also added a panel dedicated to Adobe Stock, letting you access the company’s library of stock images and graphics from right within Photoshop.

The AI Assisted Editor feature is launching in beta, while the other features will be available via an update to the app, coming for free to Creative Cloud subscribers (though, as always, many of the AI features will use some number of credits, which you’ll only have a limited number of per month, depending on your plan).

Editor’s note: the text of this article was written by Mitchell, which is who is referred to using first-person pronouns. Abby is credited in the article as she makes up half the conversation it’s based on, and gave input on its content. The lede image was taken in real life, not from a television.

It was a title and thumbnail that was bound to get my attention. YouTuber Hunter Creates Things’ video “The Internet’s Most HATED Photography Trend” shows a blurry picture and with the word “tv.” in red. Clicking on it, I thought it was going to be about shutter drag (“TV” being how some brands refer to their cameras’ shutter priority modes), a photographic technique that’s almost inescapable amongst photographers right now. “I can see why people don’t like this,” I thought, “but I’m interested what this person has to say.”

Treat this video as required viewing; the rest of the article probably won’t make much sense if you haven’t seen it.

That’s not at all what it was about. Instead, it’s about a trend I’d totally missed: one where photographers will use their cameras to capture what’s playing on their televisions, often producing an image that looks very different to the one originally broadcast. I reacted… strongly to both the concept and the video about it, immediately sending it to my coworker Abby Ferguson with the message: “not gonna lie, I don’t think I can get behind this.”

This kicked off a conversation that was interesting enough that we thought it’d be worth sharing with you. But first, a bit of background info for context: Abby has an MFA in fine arts, thus is more well-versed in art history and theory than I am. Meanwhile, I have a background in video, and have even filmed sports for television before.

This image by Matthew Johnson is one of the examples Hunter discusses in his video.

When I first shared the video Abby had, unsurprisingly, already heard of the controversy.

Abby: I remember when those photos of the figure skater came out. I also didn't realize at the time that he was just taking photos of his TV and was pretty disappointed. I have very, very mixed feelings about them.

I replied that two of Hunter’s comments got under my skin in particular: the first was his assertion that “neither you or I are qualified to say whether this is good art,” which both of us disagreed with. The second was when he said “The goal of sports broadcast television is not to be art, but these photos don’t have to be information-first, aesthetics second. If you think about it, I don’t think I would ever take a screenshot of ESPN, and put that on my wall.”

Mitchell: Spoken like someone who honestly hasn't watched a sports broadcast in the last… I dunno, decade. They're so well-produced now, and there's clearly artistic shots and compositions on display?

Related: Abby’s interview with a videographer for the Super Bowl Halftime show

Abby: I do kind of get what he's saying with that line actually. Yes, broadcasts do now have artistic shots and compositions, but they are still more in the realm of documentary/photojournalism. These photos (though I kind of have a hard time calling them photos), take a more abstract approach.

Mitchell: Sure. But if I took a screenshot from that and edited it to produce the same effect that the photographers have, I feel like people would rightly call that plagiarism.

I’m not entirely sure, in retrospect, that this statement holds water. It’s probably more defensiveness based on having been on the opposite side of the TV. Abby pointed out that things are rarely that clear cut.

Abby: Maybe…but in the art world there's a rough understanding that you can take someone's original art and modify it to become your own. There's never been a clear black and white line about HOW modified, so I think these would very much fall into the gray area. They don't look like the original broadcast, so they become something new.

I still have issues with it, but from a legal perspective, I'm not sure they would be considered plagiarism.

We both agreed that things get extra dubious when creators taking pictures of their TV try to obscure what they’re doing, or don’t credit the source. And neither of us thought that taking what is essentially a crop of an existing composition is the same as actually being there and deciding how to capture the scene.

Abby: It feels….lazy? Like he's just doing this from the comfort of his living room while the actual footage is from people working their butts off.

Mitchell: But yeah, to your point, there is an art to the remix

Abby: I like the images, I just wish his process was different. Do that on actual subjects in real life.

In his video, Hunter brings up the 1974 series “TV Shots” from famed photographer Harry Gruyaert, where he also took photographs of his television playing the Olympics, sparking a similar debate. But both Abby and I agreed that Gruyaert’s work just… feels different. There are a lot of potential reasons why. Maybe subconsciously we’re appealing to authority; surely it must be more meaningful when a Magnum photographer does it? Perhaps it’s framing. Gruyaert posed his images as an interrogation of the medium of television itself. Or maybe it’s simply technological. A film photo of a CRT television showing a standard definition broadcast with deliberately wonky colors looks nothing like a photo taken by someone who was actually there. With 4K livestreams, the lines between shots for TV and shots of it blur.

We more or less left the conversation there, as we remembered that we probably had more productive things to do. But it’s also easy to see why we wound up talking about a video that I had mostly sent as a throw-away: it, and the pieces it discuss, relate to a lot of hot-button topics in 2026. Ever since YouTuber HBomberGuy released his four-hour magnum opus on plagiarism, there’s been renewed scrutiny around crediting people’s work (further fueled by how many generative AI systems are trained on existing material), and there are still people who, during debates on what counts as art, bring up Marcel Duchamp submitting a signed urinal* for an exhibition in 1917.

That’s part of what made us decide to share this conversation; obviously, we have our own perspectives, but they’re not going to be the only ones. Consider this the start of a discussion, as we’d be very interested to hear your thoughts on the trend and Hunter’s video. Be sure to join us in the comments below.

* Whether he was the one that signed it is up for debate.

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

With Ricoh’s announcement of the GR IVx, due out in “winter 2026 or later,” the company has also said that production of the GR IIIx, IIIx HDF, and IIIx Urban Edition cameras will end in October. It specifies that this schedule is for Japan, and notes that “ending dates may differ for overseas regions.”

The GR IIIx and its variants, which feature 40mm equiv. F2.8 lenses, rather than the GR-standard 28mm equiv. model, have long been a bit hard to get your hands on, facing frequent stock issues in the US. That, taken with the company’s citation of the “availability of certain parts ending” in its announcement of the discontinuation, means that this move isn’t necessarily surprising.

What is a bit odd is that it appears to be happening before the GR IVx arrives, at least by a few months. While production ending before doesn’t ensure stock will run out, it won’t help the camera’s availability issues if people who don’t care about the upgrades coming with the IVx rush to get their hands on them before they’re gone. There’s likely to be some extra incentive there too; the GR IV was substantially more expensive than its predecessor and, while Ricoh hasn’t announced pricing for the IVx, we wouldn’t expect that trend to change. 

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

Apple has announced a special event on September 9 at 10am PT (1pm ET / 6pm BST). While the company is characteristically coy about what’ll be announced – basically the only information that it’s shared is the title of the event, which is “surprise and shine” – its early September events are traditionally reserved for new iPhones. 

There was a time when it was relatively easy to predict what would be announced at these events: two sizes of iPhone Pro and one or two sizes of the standard iPhone. But Apple’s roster of annually updated models has expanded, and is rumored to do so further. There’s now a budget model (currently the iPhone 17e) and an ultra-thin phone called the “Air.” If rumors are to be believed, this year’s event will also see the introduction of what would be Apple’s first folding phone, too. 

Based on how Apple’s release schedule has worked in previous years, we wouldn’t expect to see a new “e” model at this event, though there are murmurs that Apple may even defer the launch of the new base model iPhone to a later event. In other words, we’d get what’ll presumably be called the iPhone 18 Pro, but not the standard iPhone 18. 

At the moment, though, that’s all still speculation. Only Apple knows for sure what it has in store, and we’ll find out in around two weeks.  

OM System is teasing “something new” coming September 9. Whatever it is, the company wants you to know it’ll have an EVF: the video it posted to its social media channels prominently focuses on that particular feature, while showing way more than we’ve come to expect for this kind of pre-announcement teaser.

Usually, companies will post a silhouette of a camera draped in deep shadows, with just a few parts sticking through to suggest its shape. And at first, that’s what OM System’s video seems like, opening with a shot looking through an EVF before presumably showing several sample photos depicting city life. But then, it closes with a shot of a camera floating up through the air with a surprising amount of the top and back plate visible. Sure, there are still plenty of shadows, but we can still see that the camera is using OM System’s familiar design language, and that it’ll have a fair number of controls.

Of course, there’s still plenty the teaser doesn’t reveal; there’s no hint at specs, price or branding. For those, we’ll have to wait until September 9.

When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.

GoPro is finally releasing the Mission 1 Pro ILS, the tiny video camera with a Micro Four Thirds mount the company announced back in April. The standard Mission 1 Pro, which comes with a fixed lens and a Type 1 (128mm²) sensor, has been available for a while now and represented a big step up from the company’s traditional action cameras, but the version with an interchangeable lens is an even bigger change. 

Like the standard Mission 1 Pro, the ILS’s Type 1 sensor has very fast readout speeds, allowing it to capture 4:3 open gate footage at 8K up to 30p, and at 4K up to 120p. Switch to 16:9 recording, and it can do 60p and 240p, respectively. It can also record using an HLG curve for HDR footage straight out of camera, or in GoPro’s GP-Log2 for more flexibility in post, and supports 32-bit float for audio, to virtually eliminate the risk of your sound clipping. 

While it’s tempting to see the Mission 1 Pro ILS as an enthusiast camera, there are clear indications that it’s aimed more towards video professionals, and the time we’ve spent with the camera so far supports this. Its Micro Four Thirds mount has no electronic contacts, so it can’t do autofocus, nor does it support the focus-by-wire or electronic aperture actuation required by most of the photo-focused Micro Four Thirds lenses on the market (as in, almost everything from Panasonic or OM System). That also means you’ll need to manually pull focus, and while the camera has assistance tools like focus peaking and magnification, that’s still no easy task if you’re using the 2.59″ rear display. 

Thankfully, alongside the ILS, GoPro is launching a new app for iPhone and iPad called Mission Monitor. It not only lets you use a phone or tablet to preview your image and control the camera on a much larger screen, but also supports tools like focus peaking, LUT view assist and frameline overlays. 

That app mainly operates over USB, rather than Wi-Fi, like the consumer-focused Quik app (though that can be used with this camera, too). This again reinforces that the camera is aimed towards a very different audience than the company’s traditional action cameras. Rather than being a self-contained option that you can set and forget, it’s something you or a dedicated camera operator actively have to manage, likely with the assistance of a rig with tools like a monitor and follow-focus rig. It’s also worth noting that, unsurprisingly, given its lens mount, this is a GoPro that’s only weatherproof, rather than waterproof. 

We plan on doing some more testing with the Mission 1 Pro ILS soon to see how it works for a variety of use cases, including as a tool for photographers, as it also has the ability to take 50MP stills, and an accessory grip that makes it feel more like a traditional compact (albeit one with even less manual control than usual and no autofocus). If you have any questions about it, let us know in the comments below. 

The GoPro Mission 1 Pro ILS is available to pre-order for $700 from the company’s website, which is the same price as the standard Mission 1 Pro (though it’s already on sale at a $100 discount and has a built-in lens). The company says it’ll be available at traditional retailers in September.

GoPro

GoPro Mission 1 Pro ILS

• Shop Now at GoPro
• Shop Now at B&H