The Google Pixel 11 Pro XL camera performance is evaluated across photo, zoom, and video use cases using DXOMARK’s objective measurements and perceptual analyses to assess imaging performance across common shooting conditions. This article provides a structured summary of DXOMARK’s lab measurements and perceptual analyses to describe the device’s imaging performance.
Overview
Key camera specifications:
- Primary: 50 MP, f/1.68, 82° (wide), 1/1.3″, Octa PDAF
- Ultra-wide: 48 MP, f/1.7, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1/2.51″
- Tele: 48 MP, f/2.8, 123° (periscope telephoto), 1/1.95″, Quad PDAF, OIS, 5x optical zoom
The Google Pixel 11 Pro XL camera delivers a strong overall performance, with consistent results across both photo and video use cases. The device provides a pleasant and reliable rendering in most conditions, with strong exposure and color performance, stable autofocus and a good overall balance between texture preservation and noise reduction. The camera also benefits from improvements compared with the previous generation, particularly in telephoto photography and portrait rendering.
Many of these improvements are enabled by new hardware and Google’s continued investment in AI-powered photography features. The new 48 MP telephoto camera offers 30% higher light sensitivity and extends Pro Zoom up to 120x, compared with 100x on the previous generation. Beyond pure image quality, Google is also using AI to expand the possibilities of photography and improve the overall photographer experience, with features designed to enhance facial details, refine images and provide more creative control. However, our testing occasionally revealed visible artifacts at the boundaries between enhanced and non-enhanced image regions.
In photo mode, the Pixel 11 Pro XL performs particularly well in terms of exposure, color and overall image quality. The extended dynamic range allows the device to handle challenging scenes effectively, while vivid colors and natural skin tones provide a generally pleasant rendering. The telephoto camera has also improved, offering more natural fine details and better texture preservation than last year’s model, while the 120x AI-assisted zoom extends the device’s reach for long-distance photography.
Video performance is generally good, but the device remains behind the best competitors, particularly the iPhone 17 Pro. Standard video provides reliable exposure, color and autofocus, but more demanding scenes reveal limitations in stabilization, motion handling and lowlight rendering. The ultra-wide camera can also show some loss of fine details, while contrast can sometimes be slightly too high in bright and HDR scenes.
Overall, the Pixel 11 Pro XL offers a well-rounded camera experience, with its strongest results coming from still photography, telephoto rendering and consistent color and exposure performance. The improved telephoto camera and 120x Pro Zoom complement Google’s increasingly sophisticated AI photography features, which aim not only to improve image quality but also to enhance the overall photography experience. While some limitations remain in video and secondary-camera performance, the device provides a competitive experience across most shooting scenarios.
We also tested the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL Video Boost feature. To learn more about our Video Boost test, click here.
Scoring
Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL
168
camera
Use cases & Conditions
Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.
Portrait
Portrait photos of either one person or a group of people
Outdoor
Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)
Indoor
Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)
Lowlight
Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)
Zoom
Photos and videos captured using zoom (more than 1x)
Pros
- Pleasant exposure with extended dynamic range
- Vivid colors with natural skin tones in all lighting conditions
- Stable and accurate autofocus in most conditions
- High levels of texture detail and well-controlled noise
- Well segmented subject and progressive blur gradient in Portrait mode
Cons
- Some exposure instabilities visible in night conditions
- Residual motion is still visible in dynamic videos
- Loss of details can occur in all conditions when using ultra-wide camera module
- Residual noise in video lowlight can be visible
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL – Accurate exposure and color, nice details
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Warmer colors and less details
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Lower exposure, more muted colors and lower details
The Google Pixel 11 Pro XL provides a generally strong lowlight photo experience, with good exposure and a wide dynamic range allowing the camera to preserve information across both bright and dark areas of the scene. Noise is generally well controlled, while fine details remain reasonably well preserved, resulting in a pleasant overall rendering even when light levels decrease. However, some exposure instabilities can occasionally be observed in night scenes, and the contrast can sometimes appear slightly too strong, affecting the balance between the subject and background.
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL – Nice and pleasant exposure and color, fair segmentation and blur gradient
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Nice and pleasant exposure and color, some segmentation artifacts
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Pleasant exposure and color, higher level of details and good segmentation and blur gradient
Portrait photography is another area where the Pixel 11 Pro XL has made noticeable progress. When shooting with default camera mode, portrait are well exposed with very pleasant skin tones under most lighting conditions. Fine details are recovered on faces leading to high quality in portrait photography experience. Subject segmentation is generally good, including around smaller details, while the blur transition is sufficiently progressive to produce a natural-looking background rendering. The gap with the iPhone 17 Pro has effectively closed when using Portrait mode compared with the previous generation, although the iPhone still provides slightly better facial texture, cleaner segmentation of fine details and a more progressive blur gradient, while the latest Vivo and Oppo devices remain ahead in overall bokeh quality.
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL – Pleasant portrait rendering overall
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL – Long range, fine details are more natural
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Long range, fine details are less natural
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Long range, fine details are less natural
The telephoto experience represents a clear improvement compared with the previous generation. Fine details appear more natural, with generally improved texture preservation while noise remains relatively low, allowing the Pixel 11 Pro XL to produce convincing results at longer focal lengths. The device is slightly better than the iPhone 17 Pro in this area, offering similar performance in the medium zoom range and often showing an advantage at longer zoom ratios above 5x, although the overall rendering does not consistently reach the level of the very best telephoto systems available on the market.
Test summary
About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s camera evaluations take place in laboratories and real-world situations using a wide variety of use-cases. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly using measurement software in our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests where a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us on how to receive a full report.
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL Camera Scores
This graph compares DXOMARK photo and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.
Photo
171
Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests
For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 3,800 test images in controlled lab environments as well as outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, landscape and zoom photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.
The Google Pixel 11 Pro XL delivers a strong photo experience, with a good balance between exposure, color, detail preservation and noise reduction across different lighting conditions. Target exposure is generally accurate and pleasant, and the extended dynamic range allows the camera to preserve a good amount of information in both bright and dark areas. This makes the device reliable in high-contrast scenes, although some contrast limitations can become visible in particularly bright or HDR conditions.
Color rendering is another strength of the camera. Colors are generally vivid and pleasant, while skin tones remain natural across outdoor and indoor conditions. The rendering remains consistent between different shooting environments, helping the camera produce a reliable result without excessive color deviations. Autofocus is also stable and accurate in most conditions, contributing to a dependable shooting experience when capturing both static and moving subjects.
The Pixel 11 Pro XL provides a good overall compromise between texture preservation and noise reduction. Fine details remain generally well preserved, while noise is kept at a relatively low level across most conditions. Telephoto performance has improved compared with the previous generation, with more natural details and better texture preservation. Portrait mode has also progressed, providing good subject segmentation and a progressive blur gradient, although the iPhone 17 Pro and particularly the latest Vivo and Oppo devices still provide a more refined bokeh experience.
Main
178
Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL Photo scores
The photo Main tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera’s main strengths and weaknesses at 1x.
Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness level of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Photo HDR format, the images are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the ISO-22028-5 standard. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera’s ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Eugene)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL – Excellent exposure and colors, high level of details
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Pleasant exposure and colors, good level of details
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Pleasant exposure and colors, good level of details
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Photo Exposure :
- Accurate and pleasant target exposure in most conditions
- Extended dynamic range provides good handling of high-contrast scenes
Color is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors according to results gathered in various studies and consumer insights while respecting the manufacturer’s choice of color signature.
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL – Excellent exposure and colors, high level of details
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Pleasant exposure and colors, good level of details
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Pleasant exposure, higer contrast, slight color cast, good level of details
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL – Excellent exposure and colors, high level of details
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Pleasant exposure and colors, good level of details
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Pleasant exposure, slight color cast, good level of details
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Photo Color:
- Vivid and pleasant color rendering across different lighting conditions
- Natural skin tones with consistent outdoor and indoor rendering
Sharpness & Timing
120
Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called ‘zero shutter lag’ capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.
Edge acutance irregularity and average shooting delay along all tested conditions
This graph illustrates focus irregularity and speed as well as zero shutter lag capability, for different light conditions. Each point is the result of the aggregation of the measurements for a group of 30 pictures per conditions. The y-axis shows the average acutance difference with the best focus in percentage. The lower the better. On the x-axis, a negative delay means the photo is taken just before the user triggers the shutter, a positive delay means the photo is taken just after. The closer to 0 ms, the better. Acutance and delay are measured respectively using the Dead leaves chart and the LED Universal Timer, on the AF HDR Setup.
Sharpness and Timing: irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed as well as zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken in one light condition and indicated illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
good level of details and reduced artifacts on both faces thanks to face detail enhancement on second face.
good level of details on both faces thanks to face detail enhancement on second face.
second face is out of focus
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Photo Autofocus:
- Stable and accurate autofocus in most shooting conditions.
- Reliable focus acquisition and tracking provide consistent results.
- Portrait depth-of-field extension works well, although slight artifacts can appear around complex subjects.
Texture
123
Oppo Find X9 Ultra
Oppo Find X9 Ultra
Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 0.1 to 10,000+ lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC), and the Dead Leaves chart. We also have an AI based metric for the level of details on our realistic mannequins Eugene and Diana.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for handheld conditions
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
high level of details even in difficult conditions.
high level of details even in difficult conditions.
excellent level of details even in difficult conditions.
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Photo Texture:
- Fine details are generally well preserved across most lighting conditions
- Texture rendering is natural and remains convincing in complex scenes
Noise
122
Oppo Find X9 Ultra
Oppo Find X9 Ultra
Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.
Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Good exposure, good details but slight noise in difficult conditions
Good exposure, good details.
Good exposure, excellent details and low noise.
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Photo Noise:
- Low noise levels are maintained while preserving a good amount of fine detail.
- Some noise can become more visible in demanding lowlight scenes.
Artifacts
81
Vivo X300 Ultra
Vivo X300 Ultra
The artifacts evaluation looks at flare, lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.
Main photo artifacts penalties
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Photo Artifacts:
- Overall artifact levels are generally well controlled in standard shooting conditions
- Slight artifacts can occasionally appear around complex subjects, particularly in portrait scenes
Bokeh
170
Oppo Find X9 Ultra
Oppo Find X9 Ultra
Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.
Nice and pleasant exposure and color, fair segmentation and blur gradient
Nice and pleasant exposure and color, some segmentation artifacts
Pleasant exposure and color, high level of details and good segmentation and blur gradient
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Photo Bokeh:
- Good subject segmentation and a progressive blur gradient in Portrait mode.
- Clear improvement compared with the previous generation
Tele
151
Oppo Find X9 Ultra
Oppo Find X9 Ultra
All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL Telephoto Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
Fine and natural details while keeping noise low.
Less natural fine details with some visible noise
Less natural fine details with some visible noise
Fine and natural details while keeping noise low.
Good details with some visible noise
Lower details with visible noise
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Photo Telephoto :
- Clear improvement in fine-detail rendering compared with the previous generation
- More natural texture rendering at longer focal lengths
UltraWide
160
Vivo X300 Ultra
Vivo X300 Ultra
These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL Ultra-Wide Scores
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL – Some slight loss of details can sometimes be visible.
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Fair amount of details
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Fair amount of details
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Photo Ultrawide:
- Some loss of fine details can occur across different lighting conditions.
- Texture preservation is weaker than with the main camera
Video
162
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests
DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate almost 3 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 0.1 to 10000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.
The Google Pixel 11 Pro XL provides a generally good video experience, with reliable performance in standard shooting conditions and a rendering that remains pleasant across different scenes. Exposure is generally well controlled, colors are vivid and autofocus remains stable, allowing the camera to produce consistent footage without major weaknesses during everyday recording. The device is therefore capable of delivering good results when conditions are not particularly demanding.
However, the gap with the best video-performing competitors becomes more visible in challenging situations. Dynamic scenes can reveal residual motion that is not fully compensated by the stabilization system, while sharpness can vary slightly during stabilization. Backlit scenes can also produce slightly low brightness on the subject, particularly when the camera is faced with strong differences between the subject and background.
Lowlight video is another area where the Pixel 11 Pro XL shows some limitations. Residual noise becomes more visible as light levels decrease, and occasional color casts can affect the consistency of the rendering. These issues, together with the remaining stabilization limitations, mean that standard video performance still lags behind the iPhone 17 Pro and other top-performing competitors.
Main
173
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL Video scores
Video Main tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.
Exposure
126
Vivo X300 Pro
Vivo X300 Pro
Exposure tests evaluate the brightness level of the main subject, the global contrast and the ability to render the dynamic range of the scene (ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas). When the camera provides Video HDR format, the videos are analyzed with a visualization on an HDR reference monitor, under reference conditions specified in the metadata. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Brightness on face with illuminance levels (Diana)
These graphs represent the output level on the face measured on the images captured by the device under test in multiple lighting conditions on the AFHDR Portrait setup. We show here the intensity measured on the forehead of the realistic mannequin, for a picture displayed on a HDR monitor in standard ISO/TS 22028-5 playback conditions. The multiple lighting conditions of the scene are characterized by the illumination level in lux and the relative brightness of the backlit panel simulating high dynamic range conditions. Delta EV specifies the difference of luminance in stops between the face and the light panel simulating HDR conditions. The intensity is measured in JND derived from the ICtCp color space.
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL – Generally accurate and pleasant exposure and contrast. Slightly high contrast in some very bright conditions.
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Generally accurate and pleasant exposure
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Accurate and pleasant exposure
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Video Exposure :
- Generally accurate and pleasant exposure during video recording.
- Extended dynamic range provides good handling of high-contrast scenes.
- Contrast can be slightly too high, with subjects sometimes appearing too dark in backlit conditions.
Color
130
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL – Accurate and pleasant colors.
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Accurate and pleasant colors.
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Accurate and pleasant colors.
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Video Color:
- Vivid and generally natural color rendering in most conditions
- Skin tones remain convincing during standard video recording
Sharpness & Timing
121
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
Google Pixel 9 Pro XL
For video, autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus stability and analysis of convergence regarding speed and smoothness.
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL – Accurate and smooth autofocus with corrected field of view.
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Accurate and smooth autofocus with corrected field of view.
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Accurate and smooth autofocus without corrected field of view.
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Video Autofocus:
- Reliable focus acquisition and tracking in most conditions
- Autofocus remains one of the stronger aspects of the video experience
Texture
113
Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Huawei Pura 80 Ultra
Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Video Texture:
- Detail preservation is generally good in standard lighting conditions
- Texture rendering becomes less consistent as lighting levels decrease
- Fine details can be affected in particularly challenging lowlight scenes
Noise
110
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 0.1 to 10000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.
Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Video Noise:
- Noise remains generally controlled in standard video conditions
- Residual noise becomes more visible in low light conditions
Stabilization
115
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.
Google Pixel 11 Pro XL – Good motion compensation, some blurred frame in more difficult conditions.
Google Pixel 10 Pro XL – Good motion compensation, some blurred frame in more difficult conditions.
Apple iPhone 17 Pro – Very good motion compensation, limited blurred frames thanks to shorter exposure times.
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Video Stabilization :
- Stabilization provides a generally usable handheld recording experience
- Residual motion can remain visible during dynamic scenes
- Sharpness consistency during stabilization could be further improved
Artifacts
82
Oppo Find X9 Ultra
Oppo Find X9 Ultra
Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.
Main video artifacts penalties
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Video Artifcats:
- Artifact levels are generally limited in standard video recording
- Residual motion and processing-related inconsistencies can appear in dynamic scene
UltraWide
147
Motorola Signature
Motorola Signature
All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 12 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and smoothness of the zooming effect. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life video recordings.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Video Ultrawide:
- The ultra-wide camera can show some loss of fine details during video recording
- Texture preservation is weaker than with the main and telephoto cameras
- Detail loss becomes more visible in complex and lowlight scenes
Tele
119
Vivo X200 Ultra
Vivo X200 Ultra
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
How does the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL perform in Video Telephoto:
- Telephoto video maintains a good level of detail at longer focal lengths
- Texture preservation remains generally convincing in standard conditions
