Recently, with the third-party camera evaluation agency DxOMark for the iPhone 11 Pro Max and the newly released Xiaomi CC9Pro exclusive version of the camera evaluation and rating announcement, the objectivity and authority disputes that have existed in the industry for DXOMARK evaluation have once again warmed up. .
Recently, with the third-party camera evaluation agency DxOMark for the iPhone 11 Pro Max and the newly released Xiaomi CC9Pro exclusive version of the camera evaluation and rating announcement, has been in the industry for the objectivity and authority of the DXOMARK evaluation The controversy is heating up again.
First of all, foreign media, such as iMore, it was unfair to publish social media and articles in the first time to question DxOMark’s scoring standards, and talked about the unfairness and unreasonableness of DxOMark’s overall profit model and evaluation method. Speaking of the more sensitive “consultant fee” issue. Similarly, the foreign media androidauthority also issued a document, questioning the credibility of the DXOMARK score. Of course, they are mainly aimed at the iPhone 11 Pro Max, which has been well received in the industry after the release. Because in their eyes, the comprehensive score of the iPhone 11 Pro Max (including photos and videos) can not lag behind the first-ranked China’s Huawei and Xiaomi only ranked third (actually the second).
Second is the domestic media, mainly questioning the evaluation of Xiaomi CC9Pro exclusive version of the organization, including Xiaomi’s own exclusive version of the camera hardware configuration instead of the mainstream Xiaomi CC9Pro to participate in the evaluation, which contains moisture Wait. In our opinion, there is another question in our domestic media that DxOMark can’t be ignored. The comprehensive score of Xiaomi CC9Pro enjoyment version is tied with the longest-running Huawei (Mate30 Pro). the first.
There is a question, how much gold does DxOMark measure? How to treat its objectivity and authority?
In fact, it is very simple. From the vendors participating in the evaluation, if you send your mobile phone (or even pay for it) DxOMark participates in the evaluation, and repeatedly uses this ranking to publicize the mobile phone to prove that you are taking photos. Leadership in the industry, no matter how the ranking changes, should not be questioned, or use any excuse to weaken DxOMark to its objectivity and authority, otherwise it is “useful is truth”, subjective self-face behavior.
Based on the above objectivity and authoritative recognition of DxOMark in the industry (mainly mobile phone manufacturers themselves), let us look at the scores and rankings of DXOMARK for iPhone 11 Pro Max and Xiaomi CC9Pro.
As we all know, the strength of Huawei mobile phones in photographs is obvious to all.The proof is that the P20 Pro released last year has been ranked first in the DxOMark list. Entering this year, there are successive P30 Pro and Mate30 Pro pick-ups, and there is almost no chance for any other mobile phone manufacturers to dominate. Therefore, to the impression of the industry and the media, Huawei is unlikely to have rivals in mobile phone photography, especially companies like Xiaomi. Is this really true?
We might as well look at DxOMark’s overall ranking of smartphones in the world last year. Huawei P20 Pro ranked first with 109 points; iPhone XS Max ranked second with 105 points; Xiaomi Mi Mix3 was 103 points, ranked fifth. In terms of total score, Huawei P20 Pro leads Apple iPhone XS Max 4 points and Xiaomi Mi Mix 3 6 points.
Review the scores of the sub-projects, Huawei P20 Pro is 114 points; iPhone XS Max is 110 points; Xiaomi Mi Mix3 is 108 points. The Huawei P20 Pro leads the iPhone XS Max 4 points and the Xiaomi Mi Mix3 6 points.
The video part of another sub-project, Huawei P20 Pro is 98 points; iPhone XS Max is 96 points, and Mi Mi Mi3 is 93 points. The Huawei P20 Pro leads the iPhone XS Max2 and the Xiaomi Mi Mix3.
When this year, the ranking change is the total score, Huawei Mate30 Pro is 121 points, ranking according toIt is the first; Xiaomi CC9Pro enjoys 121 points, and is the first with Huawei Mate30 Pro; iPhone 11 Pro Max is 117 points, which is 4 points away from Huawei Mate30 Pro, ranking third (actually second).
Photographing sub-projects, Huawei Mate30 Pro is 132 points; Xiaomi CC9Pro enjoys 130 points; iPhone 11 Pro Max is 124 points. Among them, Huawei Mate30 Pro leads the Xiaomi CC9Pro exclusive version 2 points and iPhone 11 Pro Max 8 points.
On the video sub-project, Huawei Mate30 Pro is 100 points; Xiaomi CC9Pro enjoys 102 points; iPhone 11 Pro Max is 102 points. Among them, Xiaomi CC9Pro exclusive version and iPhone 11 Pro Max lead Huawei Mate30 Pro 2 points.
I don’t know what the industry has seen through DxOMark’s changes in scores and rankings in the past year? Or talk about the data!
First look at the total score, compared with itself, Huawei, Xiaomi and Apple increased by 2 points, 8 points and 12 points respectively. Among them, Xiaomi has been 6 points behind Huawei’s total score last year and has become flat; Apple still maintains a gap of 4 points.
Review the scores of the sub-projects, Huawei, Xiaomi and Apple increased by 18 points, 22 points and 14 points respectively. Among them, Xiaomi has narrowed from the 6 points behind Huawei last year to 2 points; Apple has expanded from 4 points behind last year to 8 points (this may be the main reason for foreign media to question). The following picture is the Huawei Mate30 Pro, Xiaomi CC9Pro Premium Edition and iPhone 11 Pro Max picture and video scores.
The score on the video has increased by 2 points, 9 points and 6 points respectively. Among them, Xiaomi and Apple have surpassed Huawei. From the previous 5 points and 2 points, they have become the leading 2 points.
From this point of view, after nearly a year, in terms of taking pictures (integrated photos and videos), although Huawei, Xiaomi and Apple are all improving, whether it is from the vertical and the competition, or horizontal competition, Obviously, Huawei must lag behind Xiaomi and Apple. Of course, this has a certain relationship with Huawei’s previous base with higher ranking scores. However, the significant progress of Xiaomi and Apple has narrowed the gap with Huawei is an indisputable fact. Especially in terms of video, one of the main features of Huawei’s Mate30 Pro this year is video. Even so, compared with a year ago, Huawei has not opened up the gap with its rivals in video, but has been overtaken by rivals. This is indeed worthy of consideration by Huawei.
It should be noted that although the Mi Mi Mi3 total score of 103 last year, only ranked fifth, but in the top 5 ranking, except for Huawei, the only mobile phone manufacturer in mainland China. That is to say, Xiaomi can get the first place in the DxOMark ranking with Huawei today, not accidental, but also the result of continuous accumulation and innovation.
Next we will talk about the so-called experience from the perspective of the user. The latest list of DXOMARK was released, and the relevant manufacturers and the media stood in their respective positions to question it. The best reason for questioning is the actual experience of the user, that is, the list cannot fully represent and reflect the actual experience of the user. But everyone knows that the experience is quite personal, not represented by a certain manufacturer or media. In other words, the experience can only be the user has the final say.
For mobile phone photography, we think that it is too much to deviate from the whole mobile phone, and even emphasize the advantages and disadvantages of the photo experience alone without any value and significance. The primary purpose of users to buy a mobile phone is to buy a stable communication integrated tool, not to buy a camera, not to buy a charging treasure, or to buy a toy, but a comprehensive experience and choice of various functional hardware, systems, ecology, and services. .
Of course, if we have to talk about the advantages and disadvantages of the mobile phone camera experience alone, we believe that “it seems to be a kitsch, not like a deception” should be the basis and standard of user experience. The jargon interpretation of the phrase photography is: any form of photographyIt is a limited reduction of the real world, and any technology and modification should be based on the assumption that the reality is restored as realistically as possible.
Overall, we believe that when there is only one majority of mobile phone manufacturers and industry-recognized mobile phone photo evaluation agencies today, the first approved manufacturers should not doubt its objectivity and authority (after all, form this objectivity and Authoritativeness is what you give), especially when there are certain scores and rankings that are not good for you, adopt the method of “useful is truth” to yourself, and introduce other factors that are not related to the evaluation itself to prove your strength. It’s not worth the candle, because it’s not the evaluation body itself, but the manufacturer itself, which ultimately leads to its decline in objectivity and authority. Of course, the best way is to have more third-party evaluation agencies in the future, to form mutual supervision and control, so that the results of the evaluation are more diversified, so that the industry can obtain more sources to benefit the market and users. Good comparison and judgment.